neepheid

I find it hard to muster up these prodigious levels of care regarding the subject. It's a bass. As long as I like the look and feel of it and it sounds like a bass and not a bag of spanners falling down a stairwell or an angry wasp in a tin can, I pick it up, I play it, I put it down again. It matters not to me if it's passive or active. I have great sounding passive basses (mmm, TB+ pickups) and great sounding active basses (hello RD/Victory Artist). And there are great sounding "active" basses with passive EQ controls (G&L). What I will say about active/passive preferences is that it makes sense to me that active basses should have a passive mode, even if it has no EQ as some sort of get out of jail card should the batteries decide that enough is enough. And quick release battery compartments. And low battery indicators. Basically anything to minimise people having the heebie-jeebies about active basses because the battery might run out on them mid gig. And I also understand that some people frown upon all the control available and prefer simplicity. While I do not understand that, I respect that. Some people just want a spanner to be able to tighten and loosen nuts and bolts. I think that a spanner which also makes the tea, feeds the cat and periodically spits out pound coins would be awesome

[quote name='SmallDawg' timestamp='1410216348' post='2547321'] Hello I was wondering if it's possible to wire in a single 250k push pull volume pot to a bass but have it so that when you pull it up, it still acts as a volume pot when you turn it but so that it's cut the tone? I'm tired so please forgive my poor wording haha. I basically want it so that when you pull it up, it would have the same effect as if you were to roll the tone pot on a precision or jazz bass fully off. Thanks in advance for any help [/quote] So basically you want the switch part of the push/pull to switch in a capacitor which then bleeds as much treble as it is capable of down to earth when activated? I'm sure that is eminently possible and someone cleverer than me will be along shortly with a wiring diagram

Congrats, but I think "cured" is a bold claim

[quote name='Skol303' timestamp='1409855730' post='2544055'] Audacity is a great piece of freeware (I use it frequently for cleaning up audio) but it's a little 'clumsy' for what you're trying to achieve. Have a look at Reaper, which is available for free on an unlimited trial basis or commercially for around £50. Bucketloads of tutorials for it on YouTube: [url="http://www.reaper.fm"]http://www.reaper.fm[/url] And lots of Reaper users lurking around in the Recording forum on Basschat [/quote] I find Reaper [i]et al[/i] far too overwhelming and busy for what the OP is trying to achieve. Audacity makes perfect sense to me when I try to do such things (tack some of my bass onto a pre-existing recording then mix down). A DAW is crazy complicated looking thing for such a simple task - it might as well be the flight deck of an aeroplane to me and I'm not stupid or some kind of technophobe - I work in IT and I've been using computers since I was 8. But I just look at a DAW and go WTF? I have tried a few (Reaper, Ardour are the two I recall) and it's been the same reaction every time. Each to their own. When I hit the wall and can't do something in Audacity, I'll revisit DAWs and maybe make a better go of it because I have to. But right now, I don't have to, and I really don't want to

This is the manual you want, documents the GP7SM preamp employed in the BLX 80: http://britishaudioservice.com/inst/SM.pdf

[quote name='Jus Lukin' timestamp='1409736169' post='2542723'] I read that it was (pre-eastern copies) because the shape was too similar to a Fender at the time. Gibson were made to cease and desist by Fender for making something too similar to their designs. Gibson's response was to 'reverse' the body, taking it away from the offset-body-with-top-horn look, and making the classic shape we know and love. It seems laughable now, as the majority of the bass and guitar market is indistinguishable from Fender, even for those in the know, let alone the average passer by! Still, if correct, that is why the classic look is the 'reverse' body, and the other way round, like the original design, is 'non-reverse', which to today's eyes looks absolutely nothing like a Fender! [/quote] I am maybe reading you wrong, but it seems to me that you have "reversed" things (ba-doom tish) - the original design was the "reverse" (1963-65) with the bigger bottom horn, neck through construction. The non-reverse came after (1966-69) with the more traditional bigger top horn, set neck. Then the "reverse" design came back with the Bicentennial in 1976-79. The "reverse" Thunderbird came back officially for good in 1987. The non-reverse made a limited run reappearance in 2012, still a few Pelham Blue ones left at Thomann for a very reasonable price

[quote name='KK Jale' timestamp='1409708832' post='2542545'] They didn't call the MK 1 Thunderbird/Firebird "reverse" at the time of course. But people do now, because it's pretty much a flipped-over Fender Jazzmaster, which came out four years earlier. But the OP is basically right, the whole "reverse" terminology originates in geeky early '80s vintage dealer hindsightism that crumbles, biscuit-like, under the mildest scrutiny. [/quote] "People do now" - including Gibson themselves. I won't debate the origins of the terminology with you because I don't know any better than what you've said, but it is terminology which Gibson have officially embraced. Product officially called "Thunderbird Non-Reverse Bass" - [url="http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Bass/Gibson-USA/Thunderbird-Non-Reverse-Bass.aspx"]http://www2.gibson.c...verse-Bass.aspx[/url] There's a nod to reverseness in the official blurb for the Gibson Thunderbird IV - "The Thunderbird’s unique “reversed” zig-zag body design" You can call it revisionary if you like, but it's coming from the mouth of the horse which makes the damn things, even if the horse didn't think of it first and that in itself is official enough for me. EDIT: Debate on - I found something. Gibson been using the term "reverse" in official blurb at least as early as 1976 with the introduction of the "Bicentennial" Thunderbird (complete with misprinted scale length - ha, just noticed that) - catalogue scan courtesy of flyguitars.com

[quote name='gelfin' timestamp='1409695260' post='2542447'] If it started with a Thunderbird with a reverse body, how do we know it was reverse? [/quote] Because it was/is the wrong way round - the bottom horn extending more than the top one (not that it really had/has one) in direct contrast with all its contemporaries at the time?

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1409639448' post='2541668'] Sorry I missed this yesterday, every Rick I have played was terrible, every Gibson I have tried had neck dive so these are my findings, if that upsets people that's just how it is, do I cry in my corn flakes at the mention of weak G strings, active basses sucking, over priced mass produced ebmm basses? Nope. [/quote] Well, you've qualified it now to your own personal experience and the generalisation was all I really took exception to. Sorry for being short yesterday - I wasn't having the best of days. FWIW, EBMM products seem fine to me, I keep having little wiffs of GAS when I see a Big Al... I really don't think EBMM get much of a rough ride around here though - there's this muttering about weak G strings (which I'm pretty sure if it does exist happens in a tiny number of cases and most of the time could be chased out through setup or choice of strings). If anything, the worst negative thing that sticks out in my mind mentioned here about EBMM is their rabid official forum (which I've never visited, admittedly) where apparently you'll get shot down in flames by a horde of fanbois if you dare to say anything negative about the company's products? I can't really answer the OP's questions - I lack the experience of P and J basses to give any solid guidance and after getting in a spat about generalisations it would be rather hypocritical of me to wheel some out right now What I will say is try both, play whatever you play and see which you prefer the sound and feel of, after all you're the one that's going to be playing the bass. Or just buy one of each

[quote name='Evil Undead' timestamp='1409583203' post='2541141'] ^ oh come on! [/quote] Oh come on, [i]what[/i]? I've read it scores of times and I'm getting pretty fed up of it. Gibson neck dive this, spontaneous headstock ejection that, all Gibson basses are crap etc, ad nauseum. Har-de-har-har - I'm paraphrasing while splitting my sides here.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1409512775' post='2540401'] I think this is it,if we try and venture too far from home. I look for mm tones in a jazz, a J guy cant get the mm smooth enough, the p guy misses the growl if he trys a J and the ricky fans miss the neck dive in anything else other than maybe a Gibson [/quote] Some of you just can't resist a sly dig in the ribs, eh?

[quote name='CamdenRob' timestamp='1409301471' post='2538395'] You can't do that! That's not in the BC spirit at all.... You have to chose a brand of bass (preferably one you've never played) and declare at every opportunity that it's so much better than everything else if you don't own one you might as well give up playing... [/quote] Ha, I played a Fender Power Jazz Special at the weekend. It was a nice bass, it wasn't corrosive to the touch or anything Would play one again. I am pretty omnivorous when it comes to basses. Just don't care for too thin necks. A bass is either good or it isn't, I get to decide for myself and it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks. Pick up the bass, play it. Do YOU like it? That's the only question which requires an answer and I've doggedly stuck to that philosophy. God knows none of my basses will ever be flavour of the month around here

[quote name='JamesBass' timestamp='1409247340' post='2537970'] You cannot go wrong with a Precision bass. [/quote] Maybe not, but you can go more right, depending upon your tastes

I would also like to point out that I've had zero success recording loud stuff on any Android phone I've owned to date (HTC Hero, HTC Desire S, Motorola RAZR i) - clips all to hell and back again, no manual mic gain override, just bloody useless. iPhones seem to do pretty good though. Your phone might be different, but that's my experience.

[quote name='BILL POSTERS' timestamp='1408958106' post='2534818'] Just imagine you were a barman and one of the pubs punters offered to do your job for free, or pay the pub gaffer for the privilege. The gaffer would then either expect you to do the same, or not use you at all. [/quote] I'm guessing that there are a lot more recreational musicians than there are recreational bar staff

[quote name='Chienmortbb' timestamp='1408779601' post='2533353'] In my experience it is the same in the UK Bill. [/quote] You haven't been to Aberdeen then. Granted there's a definite split between cover/tribute bands and original bands - cover bands will nearly always have their own PA so they can play in any pub they like, especially ones which are not specifically music pubs whereas the venues which tend to put on original music have PA, sound engineers, house backline - The Moorings, Cafe Drummond, The Tunnels, and some have PA and sound guys but no house kit - Slains Castle, The Lemon Tree and Cellar 35 spring to mind. I suspect that for the size of the place, we're pretty spoiled up here.

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1408703432' post='2532670'] Yes for Subs... but not a fan of Sterlings, full stop. I think they cheapen the marque... but then I tend to think EB did that anyway, to a degree. I'd say the same about Warwicks etc etc etc as well, tho, tbf. [/quote] You are entitled to your opinion, but I respectfully disagree with you. "Cheapen the marque", really? That sounds kinda snobbish to me. Providing a [b]decent quality (appropriate for the price bracket)[/b] stepping stone to the USA instruments is not only sound business, it breaks down barriers of exclusivity that you seem to think are better left up. I know this is an EBMM thread, but the related story is that there's no way that I would have gone down a G&L voyage of discovery without the Tribute models, I can tell you that with certainty. I don't find it "cheapens the marque" at all - it's clearly a forward thinking organisation which listens to its customers and that is nothing but positive to me. What about other benefits that having a less expensive, imported range give? The Epiphone Jack Casady is a prime example - Gibson had no appetite to reissue the Les Paul Signature bass (and I think they're right - niche instrument even when it was made), but having an Epiphone wing of the organisation to take a punt on stuff like this because the monetary risk is less means that it becomes reality. I think the only thing EBMM is guilty of is underutilisation of this opportunity - choice of models is rather limited (especially now where it seems they might have binned the SB14 (Sterling) - the page is down and it's not in the main menu?). I would certainly have a sniff around a SBMM Big Al for instance, whereas the USA one is a little too expensive for my tastes.

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1408638235' post='2532128'] 'cor, thats a bit special innit Matt? [/quote] It's quite a beast - really long like my RD Artist. Probably the most aggressive sounding of all the TB+ wearing basses I've encountered. The finish is pretty unusual - you can see the grain of the mahogany, but the clear coat is smooth, it's like a 3D picture. Have a picture of me playing it at The Moorings in Aberdeen (thanks to Biz for the photo)

[quote name='Bassmonkey' timestamp='1408625327' post='2531928'] Perhaps would benefit from a [i]regret[/i] but that's for another day. [/quote] No regrets, surely? Nice bass, I've been told these sound lovely.

[quote name='eude' timestamp='1408611780' post='2531716'] Where abouts? I can't find them, any chance of a link? [/quote] No longer available: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/351128657763 There was a link put up in the eBay forum on the 9th - http://basschat.co.uk/topic/242809-redsub-bt5110s-are-back/ I seem to recall there were 10 allegedly available when I looked but whether or not that was a mistake or just an old listing they forgot to take down I don't know. I like mine so much, I wish I had bought a spare head, just in case. I will not be happy if the magic smoke ever gets let out.

I've posted this up before, but much like a kilt, a gold top Jack Casady can make ANYONE look good