BigRedX

Having played in both covers bands and originals bands here's my take: I have to say up front that I learnt to play because I wanted to be a songwriter/composer and therefore I am probably biased toward playing music that I have had a part in writing but: Before I'd actually done it for my self playing in covers bands (so long as you were doing the right kind of music) looked like it could be a lot of fun, so when the chance came to join a covers band one of my good friends was in I jumped at it. For me the whole experience was a big disappointment. They had a set list full of songs I'd enjoyed as a teenager so we should have been great, but I always felt that were simply weren't doing the material justice, without actually being able to put my finger on what exactly wasn't right about our performance. Often when playing gigs I felt that the audience would have been better served with a DJ and a well chosen playlist. In several cases dissecting the songs so I could learn how to play them killed off any enthusiasm I might have to listening to them in a non-band context - there are more than a couple that I liked beforehand that I will be quite happy to never ever hear again. The other problem was that the originals band that I was also playing in at the same time, was doing much better in just about every aspect of being in a band. There's a big myth about covers bands making more money than originals, and while I didn't actually "make" any money out of either, the originals band always had cash in the band fund to pay for things like the rehearsal room, fuel for the van, recording, and producing merchandise items. The covers band money seemed to disappear in a never-ending round of repairs and upgrades to the PA and lighting systems and despite having the cheapest rehearsal space ever, each band member was expected to pay their share of the costs each time. Another thing that never gets taken into account is payment versus time spent and expenditure by the individual band members. A gig with the covers band would take up a good 6-7 hours of an evening, being at the venue early so we could set up both the band equipment and the PA and lights before most of the audience got there, and often still be there after the last punter had left packing everything away again. With the originals band we could (if we wanted) arrive about 20 minutes before we were due to play. The PA and lights would be supplied by the venue (and have been for every originals gig I have done from the late 80s onwards) so we didn't have worry about them, and often drums and backline would be as well. We would usually stay until the end, because that's when we'd sell the most merch, but we could have left at any time after we had finished playing. The originals band would travel together in the band van, or if we knew that there was a decent backline supplied, and the gig was less than a couple of hours away, we'd all cram into a single car with our instruments, keeping the travelling costs down. It also meant that everyone including the singer would be there to help carry and set up the gear. The covers band would turn up each one in their own car, and invariably someone with an important part of the PA or lighting rig in their car would be late. With the originals band there would almost always be free drinks and, more often that not, food supplied by the venue. I can't ever remember getting fed and/or watered playing covers. And while the gig fee for the covers bands was usually higher, after merch sales the originals band would almost always come away from the gig with more profit. I ended up having the quit the covers band because the originals band was playing almost every weekend, and no longer had time to be in two gigging bands no matter how infrequent the other band's gigs might be. And while this particular originals band stopped gigging 5 years ago (we've never officially split up) I still make money from them in the form of PRS royalties, record sales, and streaming/download payments.

I've made quite a bit. All in writers PRS royalties, but the money ultimately comes from the BBC from what they pay the PRS. That's why it's always financially better to be a songwriter/composer than just a musician.

IIRC at some point Yamaha changed the spec of the pre-amp and the new version didn't do what Peter Hook wanted, so he was buying up all the old models he could find. Therefore this signature model should have the older version of the pre-amp (or at least something that sounds like it).

I'd check very carefully all the production credits for everything you watch, I'm pretty certain that some of the older programmes on the Sky Arts channel are BBC productions, or at least were commissioned by the BBC. And no-one in your household watches any BBC-related TV at all?

Unfortunately "Strictly" is one of the few programmes still made by the BBC itself (or at least BBC Studios which is obviously close enough to the BBC to be able to use the logo). Having said that, don't expect any of the other production companies producing material for the various TV channels to be any more enlightened if they think they could get away with not paying musicians for their work.

Are you sure? Never watch anything on Dave or Yesterday or any of the other UKTV Play channels?

Thanks! I bought an Eastwood, although it was mainly because I've been struggling with the narrow string spacing of all the other Bass VIs I've owned and/or tried. The Eastwood seems spot on for me, although I've yet to use it "in anger". I did have a go on a Shergold original back in the mid 80s but it was such a long time ago I can't remember anything about how it felt to play or sounded.

In your opinion how does the Eastwood compare with the Shergold original?

I bought the Eastwood 6-string because it looked as though it was going to have the right string spacing for me, and I was correct. The alternative would have been to wait for an original Shergold to turn up second hand. Other than it being based on a model that Yamaha were no longer making, is there anything different about the Peter Hook sig?

No. Rick Wakeman in a wizards cloak was one of the few good things about prog rock. At least he didn't look as dull as the average Math Rock band.

My band Hurtsfall have a track "Revelator" on the cover CD of this month's Sonic Seducer magazine:

Those joins are nasty, and not what you want to see on a £1k instrument. At least Eastwood did a solid finish on their 6-string signature.

Thinking laterally, Boss do a single momentary footswitch - the FS5U - which comes in modular format so you can slot two together to make a dual footswitch. You will need to make up a custom lead if it's just a TRS jack socket on the amp.

I don't like it. If it looked like the "turquoise" one in the last photo from the OP I might be interested.

Our "German Friend"... Maybe all of his items should be added to the list of stuff not to post.

Doesn't sound that different to any other "Post Rock" band to me.

That's nasty IMO.

So the two "blue" ones are supposed to be the same colour? Which is closest to the real thing? I like the second version and would be mightily disappointed if it turned up looking more like the first.

A guitarist I have worked with had the "silverface" amp only version which he used in conjunction with a variety of 4x12 guitar cabs. BTW I was under the impression that up to the mid 70s most "bass" amps were simply re-badged guitar amps.

The original Fender Bassman amp turned out to be far more popular with guitarists than it was with bassists.

If the build quality is the same as the Edifier version, I wouldn't bother with then, no matter how wonderful they supposedly sound. Simply not robust enough for the average musician's use.

As the others have said, a complete pain to sort out - especially the first time when it all can appear very daunting. When I was registering my first release I made extensive use of the telephone help line to work out which bits definitely need to be filled in (and how) and which bits I could sadly ignore. If it's for a self-released record/CD make sure that you register both as a record label and as a musician. Luckily you only need to fill in the information once in your record label capacity.

Plenty of info here about Les Paul's input into the Signature Bass.

I wonder if the whole bridge/tailpiece/neck have been moved forward for some reason? The photos of the original examples do appear to have the tailpiece closer to the end of the body. Is there any evidence of extra screw holes under the finish? Regarding the tuners, do the buttons come off? If so you could make/get some more visually suitable replacements for them.

Probably worth it just for that "vintage" capacitor.