tauzero

[quote name='Soloshchenko' post='1097714' date='Jan 21 2011, 04:05 PM']Because quite a lot of people hate the sound of active pickups?[/quote] Then possibly the best thing to do would be not buy this bass but let someone who actually wanted to use it rather than "restore" it to being yet another run-of-the-mill Precision only with bits of wood stuck in. I imagine I'd be hung drawn and quartered by certain BC members for what I did to my 1970s P - Di Marzio pickup, homebuilt active preamp (with attendant routing under scratchplate) and modified scratchplate with a brass control plate section equivalent to the chrome section of a Jazz.

[quote name='Blademan_98' post='1098273' date='Jan 22 2011, 12:41 AM']Hmmmmm, nice bit o ply wood![/quote] That's "exotic laminates".

That's the Mk 1 shape, which was what Fender used for the revival. I've already got one. If you want to sell it, there's almost always someone keeping an eye out for one.

Friday - second gig for the rock covers band (it was going to be pop/rock but it looks as if the only concession to pop that still remains, "Billie Jean", has its days numbered). Guitarist had managed to convince a few people to come so we played to a full room. First set went well, second set got them dancing (mainly attractive young ladies, definitely a step up from when I was doing the working men's clubs). A couple of fluffs which we overcame, no train wrecks. And the gaffer told me they'd have us back when I left, so that's good news.

[quote name='Happy Jack' post='1096753' date='Jan 20 2011, 08:31 PM'][url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/QUALITY-RED-ELECTRIC-BASS-GUITAR-/230576280231?pt=UK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV&hash=item35af6ad2a7"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/QUALITY-RED-ELECTRIC...=item35af6ad2a7[/url] [/quote] "SOME COSMETIC SCRATCHES AND CHIPS" I think that's the gentle understatement that the British are so famed for.

I think I'd stick in an active preamp as well. Looks like a neat job, the routing for the J pickup isn't gappy and the battery box looks OK too, as well as one can see it. WTF anyone would want to put this considerably improved P back to something like original appearance beats me.

You've got a Mk 2?

[quote name='dincz' post='1095720' date='Jan 19 2011, 10:02 PM']Amounts to much the same thing. As you approach the power supply's maximum current capacity, the rail voltage will drop. So if you run only one side, the power supply will be loafing and giving full rail voltage.[/quote] If the load is the same overall, then the current draw will be the same whether it's one channel or two.

[quote name='alexclaber' post='1095646' date='Jan 19 2011, 08:42 PM']If that was the case then all amps would continue to deliver more and more power as the load impedance drops, according to P=(V^2)/R[/quote] No, the voltage is split between the load resistance and the amp's internal resistance in the output stage. As the load drops, the potential divider between the internal and external resistance puts proportionally less voltage across the load. Plus the amp will blow up in the limiting case.

[quote name='Doddy' post='1096312' date='Jan 20 2011, 01:40 PM']You are Jaxsn and I claim my £5[/quote] He looks more like Alf Garnett.

[quote name='LeoFender' post='1096103' date='Jan 20 2011, 10:30 AM']You wouldn't get a professional art critic writing in his column "Yeah had a look at it and its sh*t" Im sure their deconstruction of the work would have some educated analysis not just dismissive and full of ridicule.[/quote] ISTR the shortest review ever was of a revue called "A Good Time" and consisted of one word: "No". There was another one of a Broadway show called "Wham!" which was simply "Ouch."

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='1094955' date='Jan 19 2011, 11:43 AM']To be fair, threads like this pop up on BC fairly regularly. It's not specific to TB.[/quote] But as the majority of TBers are Yanks, it comes across to a true Anglophone as a bunch of petulant teenagers. Dude.

[quote name='alexclaber' post='1094887' date='Jan 19 2011, 10:32 AM']Sorry, I realise that could have been misinterpreted, as indeed it was! If your amp can drive down to 4 ohms on each side, or 8 ohms bridged, and is 500W/ch into 4 ohms, 300W/ch into 8 ohms and 1000W/bridged into 8 ohms, the xxxW/ch ratings should be based on both channels being driven. If you're only driving one channel and the other channel is silent then I'd expect to get closer to the 600W into 4 ohms on that side as the power supply has lots of spare current capacity. My point is merely that if you have an amp which can't bridge into 4 ohms but you have a single 4 ohm cab, don't feel you're wasting the ability of the amp because the redundant power amp channel is actually contributing in that your amp has a power supply section twice as large as if it was a single channel 500W @ 4 ohms amp, hence it can get closer to doubling its 8 ohm power output when driving 4 ohms.[/quote] Surely the output power will be limited by the power supply rail voltage rather than the current?

That'll be because they're rare. Very, very rare. Everybody loved them but after the initial run of 80, the machine that they were run off on didn't have any spare capacity so it all came to a grinding halt. Ah, like it says in the auction, in fact. I shall keep an eye on it but I suspect it would overstretch my piggybank.

As a further note, since this thread has come back to life - I've had to have the sides off a couple of times and what I've done to seal it is get some 2mm x 10mm adhesive neoprene tape off That Ebay and put that round the edge of the main body. It's only adhesive on one side so there won't be any issues with it if I have to do any more dismantling.

[quote name='alexclaber' post='1094592' date='Jan 18 2011, 10:47 PM']in fact running one side of the amp into its minimum impedance you'll usually get a bit more power per side than using both sides at once, which is nice.[/quote] Depends what you're running into. If you have two 8-ohm cabs, you're probably better off running one off each output than both (ie a 4 ohm load) off one.

[quote name='arthurhenry' post='1091120' date='Jan 16 2011, 09:41 AM']Where does RMS fit into all this? A Hartke LH500 puts out 350 watts into an 8 ohm Warwick 211pro. The 211pro handles 400w RMS, what does that mean?[/quote] RMS is the way of expressing the actual power. As Musky says, it's root mean square. What that actually means is that if you look at a sine wave, it looks like this: The actual average power going to the speaker is the area between the sine wave curve and the horizontal axis. This is different to the power going to the speaker at the peak of the sine wave, as the average power is 0.707 (sqrt 2 / 2, or 1/sqrt 2) times the peak power. Hence "peak power" (which is most likely the figure being quoted if there is nothing to say it's RMS) will be 1.414 times RMS power. What you also need to consider is energy - that is to say, power being made available during a period of time. This is why you may see speakers (generally PA) being quoted with a "programme" rating as well as a constant RMS rating. If you put bursts of sound into a speaker, the voice coil will have a chance to cool down between the higher volume parts. If you put a constant sine wave in, at some point the speaker will be unable to dissipate the energy in the voice coil as quickly as it is fed in, and the voice coil will overheat and physically distort or burn out. Hence music with reasonable dynamics will have its volume limited by the Xmax of the speaker (ie. how far the cone can travel), but a constant wave (sine, square, triangular, whatever) will be thermally limited before you can drive the cone to Xmax.

[quote name='Roland Rock' post='1082657' date='Jan 8 2011, 10:24 PM']I fell in love with the Henman B4 as soon as I saw it. Lots of money and not too many about. It doesn't have a fancy exotic wood top, but is made with mahogany /sapele.[/quote] Bloody hell, that's ugly. As it's a Henman, does it have anything to do with TIM?

I love the way he's playing a twin-neck for no discernible purpose, while the guitarist has had to have holes cut in his Strat to lighten it.

It shouldn't be in Ebay links...

[quote name='Kev' post='1090527' date='Jan 15 2011, 03:34 PM']I think my opinion is fairly well known, there should be such a limit on [b][i]all[/b][/i] sale forums, but i don't see much merit in just applying the limit to the ebay forum, as someone said why not just move the threads to the sale forums instead.[/quote] Agreed, with the additional proviso that ebay auction links in For Sale don't need prices to be stated. Ironically, several of the links to ebay auctions which arrived in the Ebay links subforum recently appeared (from the response to them) to have been moved there from For Sale.

I would just like to say that caustic soda doesn't work very well. It is also inadvisable to boil a caustic soda solution up in an aluminium vessel. DAMHIKIJK.