Bilbo

I'm with Doddy. Learn to read. It will (eventually) take you out of your little boxes and give you a useful tool for future development. When you get good at it, you can fuind some charts that make you play things you wouldn't have thought of. I also recommend listening to other instruments as closely as you have the bass. Trombone solos, trumpet, saxophone, piano/keyboards, harmonica - anything that isn't tunes in fourths like a bass or guitar will take you out of the little boxes you have built for yourself. Also, try some genres you are unfamiliar with: Latin grooves can force you to regroup, some classical stuff etc. Lessons are always good if you can find a teacher that you can work with (I am in Felixstowe which is next to Essex but then again Essex is a big lump of turf so, if you are at the other end, find someone nearer - the last thing you want to add to the cost of a lesson is a long drive!!). Ring a couple and have a chat with them.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='841211' date='May 18 2010, 06:13 PM']I thought the more correct term would be 'stop' on a non-fretted instrument, as in 'double stop'.[/quote] That would make it a stopboard. What are you? Some kind of freak?

Purple Bob? Are they related?

I think the explanation is obvious. A fret (noun) is a piece of metal on the front of the neck of a stringed instrument that determines pitch of each note To fret (verb) a note is to apply pressure to a string at the appropriate point in order to shorten/lengthen the vibrating string and increase/decrease the pitch accordingly. The term fretboard on bass is, therefore, so called because of the fretting (verb) action that takes place and NOT because of the frets (noun) that may or may not be present depending on the model of bass in question. I rest my case so you can now stop fretting (different verb)

I have had an enquiry from a basschatter in France about an amp I am selling. As he is not a regular, I wondered if anyone had had any dealings with him. He is listed here as [b]epoxyjazzbass[/b]. He joined in November 2007 but has not apparently posted since. Please reply by PM, if appropriate. Many thanks. Bilbo

I perfectly understand the argument for a great old bass and that they hold their value etc. That is not my point. My point is simply that anyone with £400 to spend is not going to be able to get enough money together for a bass where any of that makes a difference (unless they have a real result with a junk shop 'find'). If your bass is worth less because it is lower quality, a bit damaged and not as good as new cheaper ones then that is as it should be - none of us can predict the value of our basses at point of resale when we buy them, not really. What difference is there with electric basses? I bought my Wal with absolutely no thought of resale and it is now worth 4x what I paid for it. I was lucky. Other basses have come and gone with not profit and substantial losses. More to the point, early basses I had were a bit crap but they held my interest and got me started. I never resold them, they were crap so they hung around until I gave them away or trashed them. Thats life. I accept that, if I have £5K, I should shop around for a cracker. If, however, I have £400, I may be wasting time waiting for something wonderful to come along; that's all I am saying.

I have four guitars and one bass. Bass is what I do but I use the guitars (a jazz, steel string and nylon string) for writing and recording.

This 'get an old bass' ethos is all well and good but, unless it is my imagination, there are a lot of us looking and fewer and fewer old basses to go around. This is pushing the price up and those who only have £3-500 are frightened off by all the horror stories. Also, I think it is important to remember that a lot of these 'old' basses we are waiting for were the 'cheap and cheerful' basses of their day and many of them are not so great in relative terms. The big question, in my mind (literally) is 'is the difference between a repaired 'old' bass and a mid range £1500 Thomann bass that great. I have been reading hundreds of posts and threads like this for months now and it would appear that most people are perfectly satisfied with their Archers, Stentors, Christophers, Zellers, Westburys, Conservatoires, Elysias, Arcadias, Uptons etc etc. I have read only a tiny number of stories of people who have been really stung (literally one or two). I am wondering (and I have no axe to grind here) whether this 'old basses rule' ethos is a hold over from a time when they [i]were [/i]significantly better than these imports. Like the old 'never buy a Skoda', 'don't buy a Japanese car', 'made in Japan is crap' brigade; the manufacturers have got their act together and are now making credible starter instruments - as one basschatter said to me recently 'it will do until I am good enough to recognise the difference' . I get that every bass purchased has to go immediately to the luthiers for repairs and a new set of strings but I guess the question is; is it better to get a cheap bass within your budget and PLAY THE THING or to sit and look at websites for basses you can't afford and waste another 12 months saving for something that is probably only marginally better. If you haev £350, you aren't going to have £2,500 in a few months time; you may have £500 and your options aren't that much greater. I have no doubt that these Crafter guitars that are around now are better than the Ekos and Antorias that were around in my day. So why would I recommend that you don't buy a Crafter but get an old Antoria or an Eko and get it set up? I get the arguments but can't see that people on limted budgets should be denied the opprtunity to 'have a go'. Or is playing the double bass only an option for the middle class (how many kids on that 'Young Musician' thing are living in a sixth floor flat on a rough estate?)?

This is one of the issues that I find shows the limitations of language. The only way I can describe it is to suggest that playing ahead of the beat gives a sense of urgency to the playing (fusion, rock) whilst playing behind the beat creates a much lazier feel (reggae). The trick is to not be playing a beat ahead or behind, ie. speeding up or slowing down, but to remain 'connected' to a common sense of time. For examples of playing behind the beat, I suggest listening to these tracks: the first is behind the beat - a little laid back, the second ahead, a lot more intense. [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHsLfsDgfLM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHsLfsDgfLM[/url] [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Nsys9d99HY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Nsys9d99HY[/url] This is probably no help at all!!

Welcome, stb. Nice fish!!

It depends on the purpose of the rehearsal. Like practising, there is a certain degree of focus that is required to make the best use of rehearsal time. In terms of preperation, are the rehearsals used not to get the band 'gig/studio ready' but to learn the material? If that is so, then some of this can be done before the rehearsal, be that with charts, recordings, get togethers by individual members w/o full rehearsal etc. Secondly, is the rehearsal disciplined or are two of the 5 hours spent smoking fags, talking nonsense and wasting time? Are people noodling between numbers (a thing that I am guilty of ), are people knobbing around with their gear or is everyone focussed on the job of getting the material as good as it can be. There are two perspectives you can take on rehearsals that are 'not necessary' for you. The question is, as always, 'what is the purpose of the rehearsal'? If it is necessary to get one member of the band up to speed (some bands with horn sections only call them for rehearsals near to the event as they are often readers and just need to get used to the charts). Or is the drummer struggling with some bits of the set? If that is the case, you need to remember that you are there in a supportive role to help make it as good as it can be. Sometimes that means being there so others can get their s*** together. There is often a fine line between wasting your time making up for a lack of preparation by others and helping your bandmates get as prepared as they need to be. Its a judgement call. What I don't like is being a live Jamey Aebersold cd for a hornplayer to blow against (that's not rehearsing, that is playing and I'll leave that for the gig). Rehearsals are for topping and tailing, for nailing arrangements, for preparing things that require the attention of the collective. Learning songs can be done in someone's home without the need for a full band rehearsal. Miles Davis never rehearsed. Jazzers generally don't very much, at least not the average Joe. Yet, when John McLaughlin first played with his trio with Jeff Berlin and Trilock Gurtu (a predecessor for the Trio that recorded Live at the Royal Festival Hall), the band practised for nine hours a day for two weeks straight for a two hour set. Magnum used to rehearse every day in the early days and, boy, it sounded like it - rock solid. It is all based on a decision on how good you want to be and how much rehearsal it will take to get that good. Noone ever got worse by over rehearsing (I guess its possible but I have never seen it happen!!). But, real world stuff, if you have a day job, family oblifation, travelling time and expense etc it can get intrusive. Its a judgement call and only you can make it. Personally, I like the idea of intensive rehearsal prior to important gigs/recordings, rather than weekly rehearsals for gigs that may never appear. PS Learn to read. It will make your rehearsal time more productive. My pet hate is waiting around for non-readers to 'learn' their parts when the readers can nail it off a chart in two run throughs.

I often use mine for reading practice (i.e. I don't learn them very often...)

Don't waste your time with books dedicated to fretless bass. The information that you will need to make yourself a great player is the same as you would get for fretted bass. Scales, chords, harmony, melody, rhythm. The 'fretlessness' of your bass is only relevant in that you have to make sure you play in tune. Its not magic, its hundreds of hours of practice and the discipline of listening to your self and playing with your ears and not your eyes. Save your money or buy Mark Levines 'The Jazz Theory Book'. Books dedicated to fretless are pretty nonsensical. Millions of double bass players can't be wrong PS I have played fretless pretty much exclusively for 24 years.

I post mine here......

[quote name='CHRISDABASS' post='838693' date='May 16 2010, 10:54 AM']probably the cleanest looking control cavity ive ever seen![/quote] Paul Herman employs these tiny little Hobbits with tiny little hoovers to keep them that way... ickle people.... really ickle.

Good to see these are still in production. Mine is 24 years old now and has never let me down.

Depends on what I am transcribing for. I use seventhstrings Transcribe software and go through it step by step until I have a complete chart. If its for a chart I am going to play, I will then learn it. If the chart is for someone else, I probably won't.

Mirror - like Phil Lynot.

Who were the players, dp?

Just keep doing it and you will find, realtively quickly, that the stamina will develop. Never underestimate the value of tedious repetition!!

[quote name='Prime_BASS' post='836450' date='May 13 2010, 06:29 PM']Ok I'm stupd what's a triplet?[/quote] A baby trip..... A triplet is three notes played evenly against one beat Say these evenly while tapping your foot, each word starting on the beat plum plum plum plum (crotchet/quarter note) apple apple apple apple (quavers/ eighth notes) banana banana banana banana (triplets) Hurrah!!