Kiwi

count me in, its very minimalist. I like that, there's thought gone in to what's absolutely necessary rather than carving an sexy looking shape that might fit the human contours so long as it doesn't look ugly...

bring things back on track for a moment... ...irony. Would Jeff recognise an ironic musical statement?

its nice but would be more impressive if you were playing the whole tune by yourself I like your plucking technique, how did you develop that?

[quote name='alexclaber' post='437433' date='Mar 17 2009, 03:54 PM']I'd rather trust my ears than all this newfangled algebra.[/quote] Yes yes but you missed the point completely.

[quote name='Hamster' post='437564' date='Mar 17 2009, 05:14 PM']and a [i]moderate [/i]amount of ladies clothing [/quote] Do you have Robert Webbs legs?

but what about the equation? [url="http://web.njit.edu/~gary/430/assets/physics430_lecture13.ppt"]http://web.njit.edu/~gary/430/assets/physi...0_lecture13.ppt[/url] I refer the honourable member to slide 7 in the presentation? (Before I run screaming out of the room with my skin on fire).

Tsk, tooooo late now. To quote Scottie from Star Trek, [i]"ye cannae change th' laws o' physics..."[/i]

[quote name='ARGH' post='437359' date='Mar 17 2009, 02:59 PM']I was being a git I wonder what the equation of a Bass note being created is...[/quote] I'm sure it's out there but equations bring me out in hives. Claber will probably know. I'll go and get a bottle of camomile lotion just in case.

[quote name='ARGH' post='437351' date='Mar 17 2009, 02:54 PM']Its all in the hands man[/quote] No its not It's physics.

[quote name='alexclaber' post='437277' date='Mar 17 2009, 01:57 PM']It means accurate reproduction of the source.[/quote] Only if you can prove it empirically and persuade other people to accept your assertion. Otherwise its an opinion just like anyone elses. [quote name='ARGH' post='437016' date='Mar 17 2009, 11:01 AM']"I A/B'd two stingrays with different anchoring and they sounded the same to me. I've also made one post where I described at length my experiences of the two systems but someone's deleted the thread from what I can see and not put it on wiki. I really can't be arsed typing it all out again apart from saying the string vibrates between two points - the nut and the saddle. What happens either side of that is largely irrelevant. All IMO of course." Pretty much correct,although a small amount of vibration will go into the string anchor and beyond the nut,maybe bring wood into the picture a little more,but what matters is metal vibrating over magnet.[/quote] Oh good, so for the sake of enjoying this rare moment of consensus, how about we completely forget that the metal is attached to wood which in itself has a resonant frequency that differs to metal and might otherwise influence the way in which the metal vibrates thereby making the whole argument inconveniently messy and complicated?

Its an early Spalt bass? Nice! I like these, but I'd prefer one that has the adjustable body bits.

[quote name='Eight' post='437263' date='Mar 17 2009, 01:48 PM']My pov, is against the people who claim to take it all seriously and believe they are part of an elite magical creative force capable of revolution without any of the knowledge that has been built up over centuries by a huge number of talented musicians.[/quote] They were so last week though.

[quote name='BigRedX' post='436964' date='Mar 17 2009, 10:17 AM']For me what is interesting is not what is already considered classic but what will achieve that status in the next 20-30 years. I think the they will be like the Wal basses - a recognisable shape and a couple of high-profile users with individual sounds.[/quote] OK, so taking nostalgia as a starting point and projecting 20 years into the future where the teenagers who are currently making do with schecters, warwick rock basses and yamahas can actually afford something a little more high end, what noughties basses are they going to look back on and wish they'd really owned? Warwick Katana? Status Graphite S2? Spector NS-5XL? In the current music scene I can't see a lot of movement away from the vintage Fender market myself. I'm not aware of anything contemporary and distinctive which is drawing most teenage bass players away from that. Warwick was about as close as it got, in my view. But I'm sure there are some teen bassists on the forum who could describe what they think they'd like to own 20 years from now?

[quote name='liamcapleton' post='436825' date='Mar 17 2009, 01:19 AM']I for one hear a massive difference in tonal variation in alder and ash basses specifically[/quote] Just to clarify, do you mean differences between ash and alder? Or do you mean that ash and alder sound different to other woods? [quote name='ARGH' post='436839' date='Mar 17 2009, 03:17 AM']get the P P/U in the right place and strings through the body,the rest is really aesthetic.[/quote] I A/B'd two stingrays with different anchoring and they sounded the same to me. I've also made one post where I described at length my experiences of the two systems but someone's deleted the thread from what I can see and not put it on wiki. I really can't be arsed typing it all out again apart from saying the string vibrates between two points - the nut and the saddle. What happens either side of that is largely irrelevant. All IMO of course. Also on the subject of wood and 'growl' there's this too. [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?s=&showtopic=32715&view=findpost&p=339845"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?s=&sho...st&p=339845[/url]

Spector Euro 5 and 6 and even some Status 5's were made in 35" scale. I don't think there's a huge amount of difference between 34 and 35, but the difference between 34" and 36" scale is quite noticable in terms of feel. Hard to say in terms of sound though as I've never tried two basses that were otherwise identical in construction. Jeez, I wish someone would do a masters thesis on aspects of bass guitar construction. It would put a lot of conjecture and assumptions to bed.

Jon told me yesterday he's going to aim to complete your bass this week if he can. Which reminds me, I got the quarterly phone bill today - 17 quid in calls to Jon's mobile number!!

Classic status is usually spurred on by nostalgia. This is what drove the preCBS Fender interest originally in the 80's. So if you take the same basis and apply it to british basses (for example) our time of greatest nostalgia was the 80's and mostly around Mark King although there were others too. Only if we were as excitable as the US we'd be telling each other that Jaydee basses were the 4 string equivalent of the second coming of the great prophet Zarquon... ...or something similar anyway. My 2p: Jaydees (anything other than a Roadie made before the Running In The Family album in 1985/86) Pangborns (mainly because there's an air of mystery surrounding where Ashley is now) Wals (obviously because now the Americans have gotten excited about them the prices are through the roof) Status (although probably the Strata models more than anything but watch out for those warping necks!) I don't think there's much else to add really. Those 4 brands were the brands to have back then. Burns were distinctive but mostly associated with the 60's and the Shadows, Overwater wasn't known, John Birch didn't really make anything iconic, the early Warwicks were cool but not English. Warwick have flooded the market anyway and kind of undermined their potential status as classics. There's not a lot that sets a JD Thumb bass apart from a late 80's Warwick Thumb as being special. Also worth considering: Ibanez Musicians (mostly through the New Romantics era) Arias SB basses (mostly because of Duran Duran) Yamaha BB5000/BB3000 series. At one point in the 80's every bassist who wanted a 5 string went for a BB5000 so I'd say they've got a certain nostalgia to them. BTW:

I reckon that photo would be perfect for a spot-the-pickup competition.

Exactly. The problem is that it takes a lifetime for a luthier to understand the variations in character (or lack thereof) caused by using the vast range of different exotic woods and hardware on offer in different combinations. Often its just easier and more commercially convenient to find something that works (eg maple and ash) and go with that. Also, one luthiers idea of what works can differ significantly from anothers.

It's another lesson in stating the obvious innit? Has Jeff actually met and conversed with Scott Thunes sufficiently to distinguish between the guys own problems and the extent of issues that Jeff claims exist in the wider musical world? Also giving Jeff the benefit of any doubt for a second, I don't know why he takes so many words to say 'where's the craftsmanship gone?' I'd agree with him on that but point out that its not just music, its many aspects of creative endeavour - music, film, comedy, painting etc. Sometimes out of time and financial pressure, sometimes just to be ironic (as in Damien Hurst's work). All to do with the commercialisation of culture and the commodification of activities that most people invariably started off doing for sheer enjoyment more than anything. This is what gives rise to kitsch and noone ever really lost loads of money by under estimating the taste of the general public, did they?