51m0n

Had the exact same eexperience with my Roscoe. Makes me smile every time I play it

Right you are chaps, I'm off to look at microphones and giggle like a 9 year old in a sweet shop with a £20 note found in the gutter outside, thanks for all the input. Fascinating subject

Look, I accept I'm in danger of coming over like a troll, I'm not trying to, and truly am trying to understand the extent of the excitement Beatles influence etc etc So given the last few posts are we saying that no you'd generally be considered a bit daft if you thought that either every individual composition of the Beatles was better than every individual item produced by Motown? Or that I'm a loon for thinking that this cant be right? I just want to understand what the consensus is amongst the Beatles lovers.... What about post Beatles vs post Motown? Most people seem to suggest that the Beatles output was more than the some of its parts, and that the individual members solo work was not as good, by the same token a lot of people would have you believe that the ex Motown stable artists often produced their best work outside of Motown (Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye - admittedly still at Motown he was on thin ice with Whats Going On). Again I'm just interested in peoples opinions... Or maybe I should just go away and think about eq and mics and stuff

There are two people I can think of who I would let borrow my rig. Anyone else can forget it...

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1360937572' post='1978654'] I wasn't going to respond since the thread is now going in circles. It reminds me when a child keeps asking, why?why? why? to everything. Because that's the way it is! is the only answer left. Again, I think in most of the cases here the critics either don't get it musically, or they want to appear provocative. It's like being the guy at the party who doesn't think Katy Perry is hot. However, the comparison to Motown is frankly, unanalogous. Motown was a business machine. They hired the best writers, the best singers, the best performers, the best musicians etc. The Beatles were ALL of those things in a self contained unit. Also,[i][b] the Beatles grew in terms of expanding musical territory and social commentary in the lyrics,[/b][/i] whereas Motown was designed to be purely popular music. They both influenced a generation, but the Beatle compositions (certainly the later ones) have far more depth. As far as just "bass technique" yeah, Jamerson wins that one. [/quote] You have heard "Whats Going On" haven't you

[quote name='SteveK' timestamp='1360937705' post='1978661'] I wouldn't draw any conclusions from a lack of response. The thread is 25 pages now, possibly many have said all they have to say on the subject. With respect, probably not your most considered post. [/quote] Doesn't necessarily mean that all areas of discussion have been thought through though does it? About 15 pages were people getting all shouty... Very carefully considered couple of posts as it goes. Everyone getting excited about the chords they used being really pretty impressive just got me thinking, and the first thing I thought was Motown, and the fact is that for me there is no way on earth that everything the Beatles produced is better than anything else, yet it certainly comes across on here that that is the opinion of many. I am trying to understand how fervently people believe this. You aren't trying to suggest that no other output from any contemporary of the Beatles in that period is as good as anything they did are you? So what I am trying to get across is although this is subjective, someone decided to bring the whole harmony/composition complexity thing into it, now believe it or not I certainly think that the Beatles were definitely a 100% professional song writing team, and they were clearly a business too, just one that new it could release any product it liked and succeed like no other (they even boasted of this). So comparing them with Motown seems utterly reasonable to me. So I stand by my post, and my shocked response to the response to that post....

[quote name='Cosmo Valdemar' timestamp='1360935245' post='1978581'] I think the Beatles output compositionally surpasses all the Motown output. [/quote] So for you Ob-La-Di trumps Tears of a Clown? Wow.........

So no one willing to jump in and claim that the Beatles output compositionally surpassed all the Motown output then? Interesting....

[quote name='charic' timestamp='1360923765' post='1978315'] This one will probably suit... Thinking it might work well with my 6x10 [url="http://www.screwfix.com/p/square-hop-up-work-platform-aluminium/38093;jsessionid=vCBYRpLDD1r9LPR5jmwGj2BLcbQpbCRgxVXfg5sTfsWTyxC8XBt5!1129693404"]http://www.screwfix....XBt5!1129693404[/url] [/quote] Yeah the screwfix jobbie is 500mm high when opened up. Thats high enough for almost all cases I can think of, higher than a lot of 1x15 cabs that would have been used in the old days to do not much other than get some height (flame suit on) when paired with a 4x10. If you shop around you may well find an even taller one though...

OK, can I try a fresh angle on all this? Having watched Howard getting gooey, where exactly do we put the combined output of early Motown compared to the Beatles then - granted there were alot more writers involved, but the core band were the same (mostly) on the early stuff - and largely improvised over chord changes - it borrowed from all sorts of areas (including a lot of jazz, given that the entire band were jazz heads) for harmony and certainly the bass playing was utterly sublime, and again far more rich than anything that had gone before in terms of pop, and I would argue that it was significantly more advanced than most of Maccas efforts....

http://basschat.co.uk/topic/198204-less-boom-and-raising-a-4x10/page__view__findpost__p__1972197 In the thread:- http://basschat.co.uk/topic/198204-less-boom-and-raising-a-4x10/

Damn that is one top class slug balancing act you've got going on there mate, you should be on the telly ...

Yeah I was going the cloth route - green for me, cos its the new black darling. That ae212 looks ace , and its certainly at the "right height" standing on the hop up isnt it!

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1360771106' post='1976212'] But we'd have to listen to them on those bootleg vinyl postcards, which will generate lively, healthy friendly debate on whether vinyl is better than CD. [/quote] Jeez mate! I'll need a whisky resupply if we go that way again S'all nothing compared to the wild west days of BBC running his gob off every five minutes all over the place with joyful abandon

[quote name='Fat Rich' timestamp='1360846778' post='1977272'] This'll annoy some of you! Some interesting analysis of their music though: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKK0bCSIR4E[/media] [/quote] Truly fascinating program, Howard knows his beans, I think it wasnt only the Beatles though, there were other bands pushing things along (The Beach Boys for one). Still best argument I've seen in the entire thread that the Beatles maybe offered more musically than I may have given them credit for. Fair play!

[quote name='MartyBRebelMC' timestamp='1360846711' post='1977270'] My hop-up arrived this morning so i shall try it out this sunday - sadly this now leaves me with no excuse not to finish the hallway ceiling!! [/quote] Haha! Well don't blame me

I spot mics, cant help myself, doesnt matter where (on the telly, at a pub, at the bloody bingo) if theres an interesting mic on something I notice it. Its a disease

I'm with you 100%, I always raise my cab off the deck because it just works better for me like that....

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1360792709' post='1976726'] Just listening to Blood Sugar Sex Magik and everything sounds like it should to me. Low bass drum to accentuate the accents of the bass guitar. [/quote] There I'd a ton of click in Chef's kick drum sound on Blood Sugar

There is a time and a place for it I agree

The point is to make room for bass, and use the power of the transient coupled with it's short duration to allow drummers to play more complex kick drum parts that don't lose intelligibility in a busy mix...

[quote name='MartyBRebelMC' timestamp='1360761995' post='1975982'] That hop-up is just what i've been looking for, will do for the diy plus raise the cab at gigs - brilliant! Thanks for posting it 51m [/quote] Cool! I'd been trying to figure out a solution to the problem for ever - how you search for a fold down table capable of supporting a 100Kg plus wide enough for a single cab bass rig just kep eluding me Then I saw these whilst lookig for ladders for doing the hall (the bendy ones that will cope with stairs) - just seems like the ultimate secure solution for a bass rig.... Of course now everyone will get one and I can just borrow theirs at the gig

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1360757272' post='1975854'] Something I've spotted a couple of times is guys using multi way cabs with mid drivers, and just the woofer is miced, which is going to pretty much ensure just lows making it to the PA. A senior bassist mate went to see Nathan East play and that was going on, bass solo you could feel but not hear. [/quote] That is mental. If you need to mic anything mic the mid drivers, the low end is generally best served from a DI, if you want a really great sounding warm bass DI and you have the cash then a REDDI is unbeatable...

Cheers URB, saw him a couple of years ago with Plux at the Brighton Corn Exchange, damn good gig it was too!

NS10s were the most awful items to mix on IMO. You cant hear any bass, you can just see the damn cones start to flap as you load up the cab below the port frequency. All that trebly 80's crud was mixed on them, because that sounded good on NS10s! If anything an inexperienced engineer will produce a too bassy mix on NS10s though, because they cant hear what is going oin in the low end. There is a lot of confusion on here regarding mp3 data compression and audio compression, high bit rate mp3s are virtyually indistinguishable to CD quality wavs in ABX tests (by high I mean at least 256kbps). So if you are buying those and you have an a 'normal' little home stereo set up you'll probably (in fact almost certainly) not notice you are missing a thing. You may think you are but in a test you wouldnt be able to a tell the mp3 from the wav on your system. Mastering has a lot to answer for, all pop is mastered to be the loudest it can be, with tiny RMS to peak ratios, ibut the desperate need to produce loud mixes also means that the mix engineers are also gettiing in on that act, they are limiting audio on very peaky signals (kick drums, snares etc) to get maximum level, they are taking ducking and sidechain techniques and p[arallel compression to extremes, carving eq harder than ever to get more and more seperation. Panning is LCR as much as possible to aid seperation. This isnt new at all, I was listening to Curtis Mayfields Superfly the other day, and you can hear some of these elements even on that (LCR panning oin nearly everything, great seperation etc etc), but then the idea was to create a cohesive mix, now its to make a loud mix, the intention is different, and one thing that happens when you take this to the logical conclusion is the bass looses everything over 125Hz, because it isnt 'necessary' in the eyes of the engineer, and will make it harder to get loud. Its not directly to do with digital versus analogue really though, its all about trends in music and what is perceived to be the best way to get the mix across. Digital definitely allows for a far wider frequency range, especially in the low end, but having that available doesnt necessarily mean people no longer add enough midrange info into bass sounds into a track. Once again have a listen to the Kit Richardson stuff I did, Nigel's bass is clear as a bell, you can hear every single note and inflection, its also got plenty of bass energy - anyone here worth his salt could transcribe the bass parts to the Kit stuff without a problem I think! Personally I think live sound is at least as much to blame, the current insanity with unbeleavable low end sub bass dominating every mix and SPLs over 110dB are making people think that music only sounds good when the bass is a mahoosive wall of unintelligable sludge trying to rearrange your organs. I like it loud, but I like my hearing more, and a great mix live or on a recording os the one that carried the emotional content of the performance and track best to the listener, in some cases a wall of unintelligble sludge would be the best solution for that, but nowhere near as often as it is offered as the solution.