51m0n

Another definitive groove:- That is the real shizzle right there. If you need to 'learn' feel, play along to this for 6 weeks. You either go mad or you learn good, or both - biscuit mudflap perfiffle Mr Flibble is very angry etc etc.... Once you got that one you neeeeeed to get this one:-

My pleasure mate Betty Davis was an interesting 'character', worth diggin' around on the interweb for some biog, she was Miles Davis' wife, introduced him to Sly Stone and Jimi Hendrix, shortly after which Miles went on down the route to beaches Brew, she was also on the cover of Filles De Kilimanjaro. Waaaaayyyy ahead of her time wrt her openness about her sexuality and her explicit lyrics (very tame by todays standards, but back then - ouch she was just too hot!). There are about 3 albums out and the one with that on is the best really, the next one didnt have the all star band, its still great, but not quite as great.... Eventually she became a full on recluse when she couldnt get a record released for love nor money. Someone finally tracked her down a few years ago (by tracing tax returns of all things) and talked her into letting them re-release her 3 albums. She was oed several 10s of thousands of dollars in royalties at the time which hadn't been paid as she couldn't be found.... I had only ever heard Nasty Girl before finding this stuff out, and thats way more shouty, and not as good as Anti-Love Song for it.

[quote name='munkonthehill' post='678619' date='Dec 8 2009, 11:01 PM']Our main issues are......... A: he is a very poor musician who doesnt understand how to be a team player in a band B: he is a very poor musician who doesnt understand how to be a team player in a band C: he is a very poor musician who doesnt understand how to be a team player in a band D: he is a very poor musician who doesnt understand how to be a team player in a band E: he is a very poor musician who doesnt understand how to be a team player in a band[/quote] Fixed for you

Betty Davis - Anti Love Song Larry Graham on bass, Tower of Power horns (well some of them) etc etc

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='679424' date='Dec 9 2009, 07:20 PM']I'm not sure if it's me but I've never heard one that retains the low end enough. I posted a thread previously, asking what Louis Johnson might have used on the track 'Get The Funk Outta My Face.' To me, that's the ultimate EV sound, but obviously, it would have been EQ'd, compressed etc. to sound good on record.[/quote] I use a MAxon AF9 and that has buckets and buckets of low end. Also have an MXR auto-Q nice sound, just the one and very different from the Maxon, so much so that both together is also very cool.

[quote name='EBS_freak' post='679263' date='Dec 9 2009, 05:04 PM']But that doesn't actually stop people having their own ideas about specifications does it?![/quote] I spend my working life writing, reading, coding, and measuring results by specs. You dont have to tell me that people can have different understanding of what a spec is or means or is intended to suggest. I am all for independant verification and tolerances and meaningful specs. I agree currently the specs produced by manufactureers are completely nonsense, and in fact tantamount to a breach in certain standards. I'd love it if there was a law that if a manufactureers so called spec could not be demonstrated as accurate within published tolerances then that manufacturer was in breach of contract. Then we could all start to trust specs (believe me the specs would be brought into line in a second if this was taken to its obvious conclusion a couple of times). I hate marketing departments too! But all your comments fail to take on board that Alex is not suggesting that a load of marketing people dress up another mystery spec, but that companies use the real spec. In fact he's all for pushing companies to use real specs across the board, and I 100% agree with him, you seem to be of the opinion that this could not be ever achieved however, and so no specs should ever be printed, and we should in fact go and try all cabs in situ until we find the one we like. But even that cant be done since I doubt you can try any cab in all situations without buying it first (its not practical to be lent one for months). So we need an understanding of how well the cab should perform beyond a few goes with a band, and that requires specs. A badly designed cab WILL sound awful, and underperform, and further more, although this one spec alone wont show you that it is poorly designed, if all the specs are correctly listed between it and a well designed cab then anyone who understands the specs will be able at a glance to point out the better designed cab. There are no ifs and buts and maybes about that, a badly designed cab will not spec as well as a properly designed cab. The trick is in being educated enough to recognise good spec combinations. A badly built cab will not meet the specs it has assigned to it, and so will fail any tests against those specs. It will quickly garner a reputation for failures too. As for modelling algorithms, rest assured that they are now close enough to tell you more than doing it by any more rough and ready process. I agree that nothing is the same as building it, but you can't build it 500 times, whereas you can model it 500 times. That would be why Formula 1 spend so much money on modelling. And believe me a speaker cab is a far far simpler thing to model than a Formula 1 car. As for trial and error with rocket design, yes in the 50's, 60's and 70's there was a lot of trial and error, and there is now too, but now its done in a virtual world, modelled on computers, same with aircraft design!

[quote name='alexclaber' post='679240' date='Dec 9 2009, 04:42 PM']amazingly rocket science does a pretty good job of making things fly to the moon without having to just guess at what will work[/quote] Except in the dubious NASA issue when someone tried to do it all in Imperial measurements and then missed.... LOL!

[quote name='EBS_freak' post='679194' date='Dec 9 2009, 03:53 PM']I'm not making that argument at all... unless there is an seperate body measuring everybody's cabs, the true figures are lost... and again, manufacturing speakers is an imprecise science... one manufacturer's idea of a good speaker design may not be shared by another... Until there is come control, I'll rely on my own senses.[/quote] Sorry, but you'll be saying we cant trust the number of cones reported in a cab next. As I said, proper verified and verifiable specs are useful, anything else is not. No spec can tell you quite whether or not you will like the sound, but it can inform you as to whether or not the cab is capable of achieving your volume and dispersion requirements. Put it another way, simple yes no question for you, do you believe modeling can accurately predict frequency response, volume and dispersion from a cab? If you dont, then no one should be using software to make cabs, they need to go back to trial and error completely. Which is preposterous. If you do, then specs drive those programs, and so can inform our decisions. Assuming they are accurate. And that we understand the specs and what they actually mean.

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='679090' date='Dec 9 2009, 02:23 PM']Just bumping an old thread to say I've just switched from Musicguard to Endsleigh, and my premium dropped from £280 to £180 for comparable cover. SHAZAM![/quote] Oh wow. Nice one mate, I would imagine I'd get a similar reduction then. Cool!

[quote name='EBS_freak' post='679045' date='Dec 9 2009, 01:37 PM']Only those that are blind and/or deaf would purchase based on spec. [b]Look at the cars that go around the Top Gear track. Proof that spec means nothing compared to real world performance. [/b] There has been much discussion at finnbass and the real world tests of cabs show that sometimes, the specs really are insignificant to how cabs perform against others.[/quote] Err no, thats proof that that driver on that day could go round that fast if you believe that show..... If you put a faster driver in the car they may go quicker depending on a load of other factors that I cant be bothered to go through (see the proggie with Lewis making everyone else look like a numpty in the reasonably priced car in the wet), even the same driver on a different day almost certainly will prove to you a different level of performance from the same car. Specs are just that, specifications, they (should) have tolerances with them (or they are effectively meaningless), they must be independantly verified and verifiable or they are not trustworthy. They must specify the correct variables or they are actually obfuscation tactics used as often as not by marketing (see watts rms). Given proper specs it is possible to make very well informed decisions. Without hearing a cab though, even the most technical amongst us would not know for sure exactly how it sounded - and I mean tonally here - as opposed to "a.n.other" cab. We would know its frequency response at different volumes and angles from the speaker, the thermal and mechanical abilities of the cab wrt to its sound production and dispersal, and therefore be able to form a really good opinion as to whether this cab could possibly play Wembley and fit in the back of a Micra, when your Roadie has a very very bad back. Even armed with this info you cannot be absolutely sure how it sounds to you. But if you could tell all that for sure then all you would need to know is, "do I like how it sounds", unfortunately at the moment, even if you like how it sounds, you cant tell if thats how it sounds on the gigs you play, or if its vomiting forth its voice coil before your guitard has hit the third chorus.

[quote name='razze06' post='679015' date='Dec 9 2009, 01:03 PM']Will the appearance of more specs on the datasheet alter the quality of the sound that comes out of the speaker?[/quote] No, but they will alter your ability to judge a cab as worthy or not of even bothering to test given the application for which you are going to buy it though. How many times have I heard on this forum that all that counts is the sound on the gig? Why is that such a huge issue compared to turning up loud in the shop? Why can you not have any idea how well a cab will perform on the gig given the tone in the shop? Part of this is because you cant even guess given the specs that are published. Alex is trying to get widespread demand for proper useful specs to be published that will definitely enable and empower you the end user. Why are any of you fighting that? What is the problem? No one is suggesting that you dont need to go and hear a cab because of this spec. All that is being suggested is that a given cab with this spec should produce a similar real world volume to another cab with this spec the same as it. That is what the much hated watts RMS is supposed or purported to do now, but doesnt. It doesnt mean you will like the sound, just that there should be x amount of sound possible from the cab. Or am I very much mistaken Alex?

I listen to that track at least 3 times a week I think, on average. Always gets me feeling up for the funk; such a joyously funky bassline. Love it!

Want to hear this with 2 Barefaced Compacts!

I'm all for freedom of expression, and I've even mucked about with basses in a similar way in private, but since I never got the idea sounding any good I never dreamt of doing it in front of a, presumably paying, audience. IMO I dont think Vic got it sounding any better than I did really, it just goes to show how clever Michael Manring is, he does stupid things with his tuning and then sounds great . Certainly not a highlight of his work IMO, Zenergy is awesome though!

Well done matey!

Excellent stuff. keep it up!

+1 on the Flea comments (circa Mothers Milk IMO), very much the punk funk thing - which I dig! +1 on the expressions, I can see I'm going to have to get some gurning practice in, thats clearly where I've been going wrong!

Can I be blunt? IMO about the only blues act with enough charisma to get away with what you are entering into is Seasick Steve. You guys sound exactly like you described, a fine thing for a blues noight, but you arent going to blow anyone away who isnt INTO the blues. I dep in a very blues orientated covers band, and if we get the 'wrong' audience its hard work to get them into it (and a lot of the stuff we do isnt straight ahead blues, theres a lot of the funkier stuff in there too that usually saves the day). If you go ahead with it I think you'll need to go the 'rockstar' route a bit more, Stonesy attitude and the beatnick suits might help if it makes you lot believe in it, but no so arrogant maybe? Dunno really , but best of luck mate!

It can definitely take a while. I think the amount it changes and the time taken is dependant on so many things, but obviously the construction materials and attention to detail have a lot to do with it. Graphite is so stable that I doubt it wears in a lot. My Roscoe was staggeringly good (to me) out of the box, but its definitely changing, although I cant say how much is me learning to play it better, and putting on a different type of string etc etc....

[quote name='Major-Minor' post='667096' date='Nov 27 2009, 09:33 AM']Bilbo - thanks for this. I don't know this album (I'm ashamed to say) and I can't seem to find it on Spotify or iTunes. Can you tell me the tempo its played at ? The Major[/quote] Try here:- [url="http://listen.grooveshark.com/#/song/My_Romance_take_2/5175928"]http://listen.grooveshark.com/#/song/My_Ro..._take_2/5175928[/url] If itunes and spotify cant help, then grooveshark often can

That is my absolute least favourite kinda bass snorgle of all Awful mate, but if it floats your boat best of luck getting it! I'd advise buying a really nice rig and setting it up next door and turning it up very very loud so the house rattles along with you and the walls cut out all the harmonic content....

[quote name='Cairobill' post='666289' date='Nov 26 2009, 02:48 PM']I just wanted to share this totally amazing cut - 'Anti Love Song' by Betty Davis (better known for being the ex-wife of Miles Davis). It's a track from 1973 and Larry Graham is on bass. This defines to me what good slap is - dark, chugging and funky as hell. Betty Davis is one of the great lost artists of music. A VERY interesting woman... Turn it up and enjoy! [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxKBnR_8LIM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxKBnR_8LIM[/url] Nick[/quote] Love it mate cheers!

You get a nice cup of tea/coffee, a long unhassled sit down with all the top gear you could want and Mark doesnt look upset if you attempt a sensible haggle (along the lines of throw in that doohickey and I'll buy this extremely beautiful bass thats got me by the scruff of the neck right now). You can always ask him yourself he's Poptart on here (and a more perfect moniker for him I cannot imagine )