neepheid

You fool, what have you done?

[quote name='Jono Bolton' timestamp='1368552203' post='2078479'] I don't know if the thread title is technically correct, but my P Bass sounds excellent when I don't have it plugged in to the amp, it's loud, resonant and with nice focused lows. So what does this mean? I've heard a lot of people talking about the importance of a bass's accoustic tone, but why is it important? Surely any EQ on the amp would factor against it? Or perhaps I'm missing something? [/quote] I don't think it is important.

[quote name='Monckyman' timestamp='1368695247' post='2080195'] Hello all. I recently scored a Seymour Duncan SMB4D pickup to install in my passive OLP and I'm asking for suggestions as to what might get the best use out of it. No pre amp, so what are the options? Two Vol one Tone or the reverse? Series or parallel? A switch for the above? I don't need anything too complicated, I don't usually touch more than the tone control during a gig. Advice gratefully accepted. MM [/quote] If I remember correctly, these passive OLPs were wired up with a volume for each coil and a single tone. I think that's ridiculous, personally. Perhaps a three way switch to give you series/single coil/parallel operation, volume and tone?

[quote name='Truckstop' timestamp='1368692987' post='2080155'] Ooh very nice! I don't suppose you noticed there's another Grabber/Ripper/G3 in bits on the EBay? Body, neck, pickguard and pup surround. Maybe email the dude; might have some difficult to source parts? (it's not being sold as Gibson, just as 'bass guitar body' etc) Truckstop [/quote] I had a look and it's a Grabber copy, not the real deal. Not much common parts between the Ripper and the Grabber either. Cheers for the headsup though In any case I can't afford to do anything more this month - car goes for MOT tomorrow, and I know it wants front brake pads (and possibly discs) at the very least The only "weird" thing I need to find is the 4 position dial plate for the varitone rotary switch. It looks like this: It's far from essential, so I'm not losing any sleep over it, but it would be nice!

RE: the GIMP - if it's free vector graphics you want, then you want Inkscape. It's not super technical like CAD though (I wouldn't trust a measurement from it) - it's more like a free alternative to Adobe Illustrator. For free 2D CAD, try QCAD - [url="http://qcadbin-win.sourceforge.net/"]http://qcadbin-win.sourceforge.net/[/url] - I've never tried it, but it looks fairly straightforward from the screenshot on the page.

For me the neck has to have bulk. I have a preference for wider (P-like) nuts, but I had a Warwick Rockbass Corvette for a while which had the Jazz nut width but was extremely chunky in the neck profile. That was also fine. Thin/skinny necks (Jazz etc.) feel wrong to me and I don't find them comfortable at all so I shun them. I'm getting a taste for the middle ground (G&L Tribute M-2000, Yamaha BB) - thinner/slimmer than P, wider/thicker than J. It's probably all in my head, of course. Probably from the same part of my brain that tells me that £100 pickup must sound better than the one it's replacing - BECAUSE IT MUST.

[quote name='Truckstop' timestamp='1368659796' post='2080043'] Have you decided on a colour? Cos natural looks pretty sweet actually! It'd look great with an ultra-glossy finish I reckon. That or mocha. Truckstop [/quote] Yes, I have decided. The colour will be "Wine Red". Only Grabbers were available in it back in the day, but I think it looks great! That's a mockup, but if it looks as good as that when it's finished, I'll be delighted.

Pics as promised. Also one pickup arrived

Basically, for width I tend to use the P and the J as "standards" and then describe in relation to that. That is a standard P nut is 41.3mm ([color=#333333][font=open_sansregular, sans-serif]1.625") [/font][/color]and a standard J nut is 38.1mm (1.5"). Anything P or wider is "wide" and anything J or slimmer is "narrow". Anything between is just that (and often very comfy indeed for most players). Neck profiles are more of a minefield. What the hell does "medium C" mean anyway? Too many flowery terms and not enough hard numbers. Get the callipers out! Remember also that fingerboard radius plays a part in the overall feel of a neck. I've learned to take people's wordy descriptions of necks with a pinch of salt, as they are frequently based upon personal opinion than outright fact. I discriminate by nut width, mostly because that's often given in absolute measurement. After that I've found that I don't tend to mind what the back to front profile is like.

You aren't helping with your generalisations in brackets there, chief. There are G&Ls with wide/thick necks and ones with thin/slim necks. USA G&Ls have the option of both. Tributes are wide/thick (L-2000), thin/slim (SB-2) or somewhere inbetween (M-2000). In short, it isn't correct or useful to use G&L as an entire brand to aid your understanding of this matter.

Wheeee! Pickguard and tuners arrived today Got a band practice tonight but hopefully pictures later.

I did a similar thing to you after about 4 years of actual playing and several years before that of pretending to play. It was great to put names to things that I already knew, but didn't know what they were called, what they were for and why I used them. It kinda filled in gaps in the knowledge bank which made a lot of things make a lot more sense.

Three's plenty. I did experiment with a push pull to wire the PJ in series with each other but ran into difficulty with noise so I removed it and went back to straight 3 way with vol and tone.

[quote name='mikegatward' timestamp='1368543603' post='2078261'] Still a great movie. Fave scene is where all the wannabees knock at jimmy's door for the vocalist auditions. [/quote] Who are your influences?

[quote name='yorks5stringer' timestamp='1368535945' post='2078102'] What about Fender then: Squier, Mexico, USA and Custom shop...all look virtually identical when up on a stage! [/quote] Squier and Fender are distinct and separate brands, even if they are ultimately part of the same conglomerate. Just like Epiphone and Gibson. In the case of Yamaha there is no brand separation, so one major distinguishing factor is gone. Also the geographical pedigree is less defined - they'll all be Far Eastern instruments to some, to those who find these considerations important. To those who don't care about such things (like me), it's even HARDER to differentiate between them. Without trying one (which is my modus operandi given my location), I'd find it really hard to justify the spend on the 2024 (or even the 1024) when the 424 is likely to be a wee cracker of a bass.

If I have to learn a pre-existing song - take song into Audacity, bass boost it, then chuck it up an octave. Bass line (an octave higher) verily pings out at you. Learn it up there, then take it back down on the bass.

Soapbars are merely the packaging. They can contain any combination or configuration of coils as can fit inside the soapbar. Single/dual/split coils. Rails or individual pole pieces. Phantom coils. More turns on the coil than can fit under the cover of a Jazz pickup. Anything goes really.

To be honest, I do not understand this three tier approach when the build quality of the cheapest stuff is challenging the more expensive stuff. It's hard enough to differentiate two price points, let alone three, especially when it's the same brand name on the headstock and there's a significantly less polarised geographical/instrument making pedigree angle to exploit. Hence why this question seems to crop up whenever Yamaha's latest BBs are discussed - "why should I get a 2024 over a 1024 over a 424?" Now don't get me wrong. I love my BBs but this has me scratching my head a bit.

Looks great, and reminds me how weird Gibson's black ES-335 bass looks with no body binding.

[quote name='Spoombung' timestamp='1368514241' post='2077808'] I thought they were concerned because they were being kind and handing out good advice? [/quote] Perhaps there is a misunderstanding here - I am not (and never was) referring directly to the poster who I quoted by the way, just to the particular point which I took the time to highlight in bold. If not then allow me to retort - leaning on people with a less than friendly "we frown upon people making money on here" isn't good advice, it's repugnant self interest.

[quote name='OliverBlackman' timestamp='1368286604' post='2075330'] Theres a bit of a moral/ethics problem in this which can be frowned upon here. You may find some people are ok with it [b]but expect some people not to be.[/b] That is to say if the value of your trades and cash didn't equal upto the amount you're selling for [/quote] That will be people who love to stick their beaks into other people's business which really ought to be no concern of theirs.

Things have slowed down a lot - waiting on a lot of stuff to arrive from the States, and had a slater to pay so no more goodies for me this month. Took care of a wee job - trimming the 4 way switch down to size. Not the most thrilling update ever, but it's progress with pictures. I could probably take a couple more mm off, but I'll wait until it's in situ in the final assembly before doing that.

[quote name='Mornats' timestamp='1368471078' post='2077514'] Some great info in here and not wanting to start another thread, I hope you don't mind if I go a little off-topic! Long story short: I have noisy upstairs neighbours who works shifts so come in and thump around between 11pm and 3am. Short-term solution until I sort it out with the landlord will be ear plugs so that I can sleep Will any of the ones mentioned above help me out with this? (And would double up as protection at loud gigs of course.) They'd need to be safe and comfortable to sleep in, and hearing my alarm (my phone, placed next to my pillow) would be a bonus! The Noizezz ones appeal as they come with different sizes, but I also like the idea of being able to choose which filter to use on the Alpine Music Safe ones. [/quote] I would have thought that simple foam ones would be more than sufficient for this purpose, seeing as I don't suppose you're wanting to preserve the fidelity of the sounds you're trying to block out?

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1368451313' post='2077188'] hmm, I don't think it was a "We need to change this" kind of thing, more of an "Oh no, I didn't want to pay that much", which then became a bit of a "Is there a cheaper way to get them?" kind of thing. There wasn't really much debate over the duty/VAT thing I don't think. [/quote] Thanks for the thread synopsis. It doesn't change the fact that inaccuracies were being bandied about and I felt like sticking my oar in because they annoy me. Also, you can apply my comment to the entirety of the forum if you like and not just this thread - the same slack definitions and approximations are bandied about every time the subject is brought up. There shouldn't need to be ANY debate about it, the rules are there in black and white. That's my point.

Just caught the end of this thread and it continues to astound me how much inaccurate (or half true) information is still peddled about whenever the subject of importing from outside the EU comes up. The guides are there, and granted the HMRC's website isn't the most friendly out there, but everything one would ever need to know is probably here: [url="http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageVAT_ShowContent&id=HMCE_CL_000014&propertyType=document"]http://customs.hmrc....tyType=document[/url] In this case, see section 3.1. I realise that it's pretty moot as we are discussing the sending of commercial goods in this particular thread (and thus carriage costs are factored into the total for VAT calculation purposes, no ifs or buts), but I'm fed up of the needless debate about something that's set in stone.