Kiwi

[quote name='ARGH' post='78566' date='Oct 23 2007, 11:00 PM']read NO really LEARN TO F%*KING READ.....like yesterday.[/quote] I thought the first post said ONE pearl of wisdom each?

[quote name='Sibob' post='78583' date='Oct 23 2007, 11:47 PM']So an early conclusion might be that a single piece body will resonate much better then 3 piece glued body (ignoring laminates & veneers etc), but a 3 piece body may sound better then a laminated body that uses badly matched woods!?[/quote] My experience would tend to support this as well. My Alembic Elan 6 had an 11 piece neck and a 3 piece body and it felt very dead and heavy. Since then I've not been really comfortable with Alembic levels of lamination. Where do the laminations stop and plywood begin? I don't like the sound of plywood bodies at all. But what is also important is to make sure that the resonance peaks/troughs of the neck and body woods [i]at least[/i] don't dampen each other out and there's less chance of this happening if the neck is very rigid, at least with a bolt on design bass. The peaks should be quite pronounced and narrow in Q (frequency range), if they overlap with one another in the midrange its likely the bass will sound growlier. I think this is why the hard maple/light ash or hard maple/soft alder combo has proven so consistently attractive. If the bass is too rigid then the tone of the bass can lack pleasant character in the treble end. I like soft, heavy body woods with very rigid necks for this reason as both my Cutlass basses sounded phenomenal and I think Ped's Vigiers sound good for the same reasons. My Modulus Quantum basses didn't sound as nice because they came with relatively light ash bodies which didn't tame the treble or help preserve bass. The body wood was very much underrated as a tone shaping element in those basses and I think this generally continues to be the case in many graphite necked instruments. With neck throughs I think a little give has to be built into the neck of the bass through the selection of neck woods and the fingerboard plays a greater role in providing stiffness (assuming no graphite reinforcement). Additional stiffness might be why upright basses have such massive chunks of ebony for fingerboards. I think the consistency in a neck through design does create more consistent tonal character, but thats not attractive to everyone. I think Ken Smith has been successful in designing in a little give into his neck-through basses which helps them sound warmer than most. That doesn't mean to say neck throughs are better than bolt ons, but what I've become aware of is just how very different they are as approaches not only in design and construction but also as far as wood selection goes. The other thing is that the neck on an old (or at least well gigged) bass can tend to relax a little. An older neck can sort of bend into a slight permanent relief which means less string tension as the neck isn't pulling the strings as hard as it was when it was new. The lower string tension helps with getting more growl and I think that helps part-explain why older basses sound better and feel more supple. Again this can be designed into the neck and I think Ernie Ball do this when shaping their Stingray necks.. I would like to try a graphite necked bass with a body from softer, heavier wood like bubinga as I suspect the bubinga's tonal characteristics would help dampen a little of the graphite's brittleness while preserving mids and lows. But that also depends on how rigid the graphite neck is as well and the design of those is a dark art in itself from what I've been told and have read. So, going back to body woods to finish off. My Smith 5s are nearly identical in construction APART from their body woods. Yet there are distinct if subtle differences in how they feel and sound. The maple core fretless 5 is less boomy than the mahogany cored fretted 5. The mahogany cored fretted 5 also has fatter lower mids too, but most of these differences aren't apparent at live performance volumes. The other thing is that some luthiers maintain that the species of wood matters less than factors such as its density, grain and moisture content. Its possible, so I've been told, to get a piece of soft ash that sounds similar to a piece of mahogany. But the problem for us as players and customers is finding a luthier who can specify wood according to a predictable tonal response. Until that happens (if ever) specifying a custom bass is always going to involve a leap of faith to some degree.

There's virtually no meaningful relationship between how an amp sounds in the shop/bedroom/lounge, and how it sounds on stage mid set.

[quote name='Jam' post='77999' date='Oct 23 2007, 05:09 AM']I'm sure there's already a thread on this somewhere but i don't know where and i'll be damned if i'm trawling 35 pages of posts to check![/quote] You're very welcome to use the search engine - top right corner?

[quote name='niceguyhomer' post='77920' date='Oct 22 2007, 10:41 PM']genuinely, utterly butterly brilliant to have you back BeLow [/quote] Amen to that.

Pete, I've shifted this to site issues. I'm not sure whether we set people up to delete their own posts or not. Unfortunately bandwidth where I am makes it difficult for me to look at anything behind the scenes at the moment. I can't see any specific permissions relating to the deletion of posts however. Maybe if you drop a PM to Phatmonkey, he will be able to help you out?

[quote name='wotnwhy' post='77860' date='Oct 22 2007, 08:17 PM']with Jon it's almost the other way round. he seems to relish the idea of doing something new and unique (this was a very large factor in me choosing him)[/quote] It certainly seemed that way with my commission too, I don't think he's designed a MIDI bass before but what sold me on him was that he had already used parts from the same suppliers. So there was no teeth sucking and 'could be tricky' bollocks from him when I asked for something that deviated from an absolutely bog standard instrument because he already knew what work was involved, instead of charging me for his learning curve. [quote name='wotnwhy' post='77860' date='Oct 22 2007, 08:17 PM']*again, as mentioned a lot, the prices are [i]very[/i] competitive (another major factor in me choosing him)[/quote] He charges most outsourced parts at cost as far as I can see, which I think is both fair minded and gracious of him. He doesn't appear to profiteer which I have found in a number of other UK luthiers, so I'm inclined to trust his judgement on spec more. We also ended up agreeing about parts qute often which was encouraging. [quote name='wotnwhy' post='77860' date='Oct 22 2007, 08:17 PM']*and finaly, Jon seems to have an incredible nack of getting you the [b]sound[/b] that your after. (ie, i want a deep and punchy, or, i want it clear and crisp)[/quote] This I am going to have to wait and see. I've asked for a Ken Smith sound but with a little more mid range and a little less boom. Jon seems to think we've got the spec right. I am a little wary of builders who let me do too much of the spec when it comes to wood, it's their expertise and materials I'm paying for, after all.

There's a sticky pinned in the technical and repairs forum on this [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=1324&hl=deadspots"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=...mp;hl=deadspots[/url]

[quote name='Buzz' post='76841' date='Oct 20 2007, 03:17 AM']Aye, I concur with most of the above. Do it, and you've done your part. Audiences don't notice bass anyway (j/k) so you'll be fine, just hobble along as best you can. Worst to worst, just play roots and 5ths It'll reflect badly on him in his band as he's f***ed up.[/quote] +1 I been in this situation so many times. Don't feel guilty in this situation at all. It's up to your mate to give you enough opportunity to prepare.

[quote name='synaesthesia' post='76834' date='Oct 20 2007, 01:38 AM']Been three done it bought the t shirt mate. For loud gigs I play though an electronically crossovered sub powered by an 800 watt power amp, and usually I run a -12dB filter at about 50hz generally without losing any satisfactory trouser flapping bottom, either in playing an Alembic, a Rick, a 7 string Conklin etc.[/quote] Regardless of which, my experience is that flat cabs don't work in all live situations. But they may work in some. [quote name='synaesthesia' post='76834' date='Oct 20 2007, 01:38 AM']In 12 years of commercial recording and mixing, I've filtered electric basses of at 60hz depending on tracks. In a mix particularly for pop or rock records, this is quite a common so that you have a tighter low end, and a punchier recording, particularly if the track will be compressed a little at mastering. Your generic 4X10 bass cab doesn't really go very low in the nether regions and many people claim 'deep' bottom end nirvana with one - your average punter playing through a cheapo wireless which starts to filter off at 70 to 90hz (your freeports, some samsons, som AKG) claim they hear all the way to 35hz of their B string.[/quote] All based on a recording context mate, which just supports the point I conceded to you earlier. I agree with you, as far as a recording situation goes. However you've not addressed the onstage situation and issue of [b]context[/b] that many players on this forum are likely to encounter. Does the average punter use a wireless? I couldn't tell you what the average punter uses in their signal chain. [quote name='synaesthesia' post='76834' date='Oct 20 2007, 01:38 AM']My point is searching for flatter response towards 40hz whilst perhaps necessary for PA and DJs reproducing synthesised frequencies isn't all that necessary for satisfactory electric bass guitar reproduction.[/quote] "Satisfactory" being a question of taste? [quote name='synaesthesia' post='76834' date='Oct 20 2007, 01:38 AM']The heritage of established and acceptable tonal character of bass guitar given its definition via its historcal development with generally poor audio reproduction equipment added to the fact that many players post Jaco choose to emphasize their bridge pickup sonic character supports my claim.[/quote] Eh?

[quote name='synaesthesia' post='76728' date='Oct 19 2007, 09:03 PM']What is probably not reflected in this argument of mine goes deeper than yours is that that tonal characteristics of electric bass guitar actually does not need to, nor for the most part want to go that deep and in most cases does not produce a flat response down to 40hz.[/quote] Are you talking a 4 or 5 string electric bass? What stage acoustics are you assuming? What sounds smooth in one gigging environment may not sound smooth in another. You may have a point for a 4 string bass being recorded through a mixing desk. But in my experience playing a 5 string bass live with frequencies shelved below 40Hz results in a very inadequate sound. Sometimes its necessary to boost that low just so that the onstage mix sounds fuller. At the end of the day a flat response cab will give me more control in my set up, in that when I'm eq-ing for on stage monitoring I can be reasonably confident that what anomalies I hear are more likely due to the environment than colouring in my gear. However I've generally found flat response cabs are inadequate above certain stage volumes. With increased voumes, the stage acoustics and other instruments can overwhelm any benefits from the improvement in monitoring quality. Given a rock gig using my Alembic, a 400w valve amp and a choice between my Acme B2's or a wheezy old 8x10, the Acmes would most likely be inadequate as a flat response cab. I can't comment on the BFM cabs in not having heard one yet. If I was gigging in an environment where there were a lot of reflective surfaces and I needed to use a semi para eq to be more precise in what I cut/boost then the Acmes (and perhaps the BFM Omni's) as flat response cabs would do the job better than a 8x10. The points I'm making here are: 1) It's all very well getting excited comparing and contrasting the technical aspects of these speakers but at the end of the day, its easy to forget the other influences that affect what you hear on stage. That is to say, just because the cabs are flat response doesn't necessarily mean your whole rig will sound better when used against guitars and drums on a hollow stage in a nightclub with concrete walls and hard seating. 2) In my experience, flat response cabs are a great idea but have limitations just like any other piece of kit. However its possible to compensate for most inadequacies in the spec of the other pieces of gear being used. That is to say, if someone likes their flat response cabs because they're light and portable (whatever design they happen to be) then it makes sense to choose other kit that gives more colouring when needed. Of course the way to completely bypass all of this discussion is to invest in in-ear monitoring. Then stage acoustics get left out of the equation completely and it makes the process of eqing to personal taste a load easier.

What a stunner - good score Sir! I think you should leave the tuners as they are, they match the modern look of the bass nicely. Have you got any sound clips to share yet?

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='76583' date='Oct 19 2007, 04:05 PM']Comparisons to Acme remain academic and speculative until and unless measured charts of Acme are made available.[/quote] Unless you get one of each, stick 'em next to each other and do an A/B comparison with the same amp and bass? I think its all too easy to get caught up in the technical aspects and lose sight of the fact that at the end of the day, something maybe technically inferior but it still sounds good to a lot of people. I think others have attempted to make this point in the past. If this wasn't the case then p-basses would have been ditched the world over in favour of Alembics in the mid 70's. Technically an Alembic Series 1 or 2 is superior to a Fender Precision in terms of how its been engineered for efficiency and broad frequency response but not everyone's cup of tea tonally. I think the point Alex was making is that its all a question of taste, at the end of the day.

I'm surprised someone hasn't thought of this before - it makes so much sense, especially where "extra grease cutting power" is needed! lol

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='76152' date='Oct 18 2007, 07:52 PM']I'd better square this with a mod before I go any further. I know that I got the nod when we were a former incarnation but I don't want to pee people off.[/quote] All squared up, ship shaped and bristle fashioned. You're good to go.

that sounds a bit rough, do you have any right of appeal?

Macster, you haven't missed out. This is as far as discussions got: [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=63&st=240"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=63&st=240[/url] [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=2053&hl=bassbash"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=...amp;hl=bassbash[/url] As you can see from the links, what actually happened was that we discussed the possibility of having it sometime later as it was too close to the SE Bash, NOT because the Mods showed up. We also discussed having it in Oxford as its near where Ped lives and he was going to take over scouting for a location. No dates have been discussed yet but we are probably are overdue for one. It depends on the level of interest I guess, the September ones generally have been the less popular events.

I'm absolutely satisfied with my GK combo once I added a 2x10 to it. I felt the 1x15" lacked a little punch although that was like saying the foie gras needed a bit more salt. With a 2x10" it has everything - warmth, punch, clarity and I've reached a stage where I feel there's nothing I could do to make it sound better. What's best about it is that it sounds good with all my basses - a very flexible and honest sounding rig. (I would love for the whole shooting match to be a bit lighter though, and for there to be some durable castors fitted as well.)

Next bass bash, I can bring my Acmes if Nedsbeds brings his Omni's

As has already been stated, funk is about the one. Funk is about the aftermath of nasty, deep and exhaustive sex so visualise the sleaziest, most excessive night of shagging you've ever enjoyed and inject a bit of The Morning After into your playing! Bootsy had it down perfectly and Bernard Edwards is one of my favourite players. Larry Graham is seriously underrated as a player (even though everyone has heard of him, his feel is phenomenal) and Robbie Shakespeare is worth checking out. However Jamerson is the first and is still the last word in feel. He was where it all started. I like his playing for 1) Playing as few notes as possible and letting his music theory do the work for him (esp. hand positions). 2) Not always playing on the beat. His jumping to odd chordal notes at key chords in a sequence is part of what defines his style along with his feel. Just listen to Reflections by Diana Ross and the Supremes. He sometimes pulls back the timing of particular notes and instead of slowing the song down, its like plucking a rubber band. The energy gets released and it drives the song along. Utterly remarkable. The more I listen to him the more he really does my head in. No wonder everyone raves about him. George Porter from The Meters is also good for fat funky and simple grooves.

Gotta get the blue LED's behind the transparent pickup casings! I've tried a set in Alemboid's Status Series 1 6 string and they were indeed clear and hifi (nearby noise sources notwithstanding). However I thought tweaking pole pieces offered a disappointingly limited variation in tonal response. Technically they do exactly what the maker claims, just not as well as I would have hoped. In the end I decided to go for a set of Delano soapbars instead, they were warmer and sweeter sounding to my ears.