BigRedX

Personally I'd be more worried about the stress on the front panel of the amp rather than the bolts attaching it to the rack case. Heavy rack gear should provide fixing both front and rear, to hold it properly in place. Failing that could you bolt a heavy duty rack shelf into the back of the rack and support the amp that way?

How do I stop the latest version of the forum software from converting my text smilies to those nasty picture ones? There used to be a setting in the text entry box to disable automatic smilies but I can't find it anymore.

Says the person with a boring sunburst J bass as their avatar. 😉

No more so than any wooden necked bass IME. I've owned 2 Kramers, a Hondo Alien, Hartke XL-4 and a Born To Rock F4B all with aluminium necks, I've never had any problems with them staying in tune on stage. IMO Mick Karn always sounded better with the Travis Bean.

No it's an Ibanez Black Eagle

Production fashions go in cycles. That much is obvious from the few comments here already. In the 80s I couldn't stand listening to most of the albums I'd grown up with in the 70s due to (at the time) sterile sounding production with their weedy cardboard box drums. Now it all, sounds fine again to my ears. I can remember someone on one of the recording forums in the late 90s berating the gated reverb drum sounds and wondering how we ever tolerated them. It didn't go down too well when I suggested that in another 10 years time they'd be saying the same about the currently fashionable ping-y snare drum sounds. And to answer the OPs question, it is for me not so much about the production as about songwriting quality control. There's plenty of albums on CD from the mid 90s onwards that are simply TOO LONG. Just because the CD format allows you to put 80 minutes worth of music on a single album doesn't mean that you should. Like most albums there are a couple of killer tracks, some other songs that are OK and then an additional 40 minutes of self-indulgent rubbish. I find that the higher proportion of poor songs makes me less likely to listen to the album as a whole, whereas if it had been a normal 35-40 minute release I'd have probably played it more often and spent time getting to like the less obvious songs. Instead I just stick with the 2 or 3 tracks I know I like and never listen to the rest.

I think latency probably depends on the Bluetooth device that you transmitting to. I've had to ditch a pair of Bluetooth headphone for watching video on my Mac because there was a noticeable delay between the images on screen and the sound from the headphones. Also with a Bluetooth mini-hifi you are dependant on the quality of the D/A conversion in the hifi. Personally I'm not convinced by unnecessary wireless connections. In my house at any one time I can see 15-20 different wifi networks not including my own and any that have their SSIDs hidden. All those routers and the devices connected to them are fighting for bandwidth and dominance, and invariably there are problems with dropouts and some devices losing their wireless connection. And depending on the Mac the OP may have more options than just the headphones out socket. Most Macs also have a digital audio output as well as the analogue one.

Bluetooth is fine if all you want to do is get the audio out of computer to better speakers than the built-in ones, but if you require synchronisation to video displaying on the monitor or you are going to be playing an instrument also routed through the computer along with a track then the latency is simply too high.

I'd have to agree with this. After immensely enjoying the first two Clash albums, I found London Calling distinctly underwhelming. Other than the tilted track and "Lost In The Supermarket" the only other track I like from those recordings - Armagideon Time - isn't even on the album.

The Electrical Guitar Company make some very nice looking instruments. That boring P-Bass copy isn't one of them. Even if you could patent styling features, any patent would have run out a long time ago for both the TB and Kramer versions.

What are the speakers for? Just a better/louder reproduction of audio from iTunes/Spotify/YouTube etc.? Or as part of a home recording set up? In the case of the first stevie has already answered you question. In the case of the second you should really be looking at an audio interface with better D/A convertors between the Mac and the amp.

The way I look at it, is because the effects/amps/cabs are just models I can use any of them without worrying about them getting damaged due to feeding them with inappropriate signals in terms of frequency or level. At the moment my favourite amp model to use on the bass is the one based on the Roland Jazz Chorus amp. Because the worst thing that can happen is the end result won't sound very good, I'm just getting in and experimenting. Everything and anything is available for me to use. Stop thinking that you have to use models of bass equipment for processing your bass guitar and try something different.

But which is the "classic" line-up? Bill Buford or Alan White on drums Tony Kaye, Rick Wakeman or Patrick Moraz on keyboards?

As others have said the "Jazz" basses from the two companies have very little in common other than they both share a body shape that has its roots in the Jazz basses produced by Fender. Beyond that everything is different. It's pretty much the same with any two high-end basses from different luthiers. While they might seem superficially comparable, for the discerning musician, you pick the one that speaks to you.

Also while The Terrortones were without a permanent drummer and using deps, two of them were readers. One only used his scored-out drum parts while he was working out the songs with us in rehearsal. Once we were gigging everything was played from memory. The other had his parts set up on a music stand, put it still didn't prevent him from messing up the drums on our single twice, in two different ways.

Although none of them have actually used the skill while playing in any of my bands I suspect at least 3 of the drummers I've worked with could read. One used to play side drum in the Boys Brigade. One had previously worked in Nashville as a session drummer. One, as well as teaching drums full time for a living, is also an orchestral percussionist.

I quite like that finish on the body. And unlike manufacturers of other bolt-on neck basses, I'd trust Warwick to have made that neck joint function properly despite the way it looks. When I read the title I was expecting to see this bass:

The easiest way is to get someone else to do it for you. There are plenty of budding film-makers around who will do the job for £100-200. This Terrortones "performance" video was done for about £150 which included hiring the venue where it was shot, took a couple of hours to film and the approved edit was completed by the end of the week.

The relative heights of the bridge should match the radius of the fingerboard. Since the bridge is specifically produced for this particular bass, there isn't any reason for the action of each string to be individually adjustable. If there is a problem on just one string then there is probably something wrong with the frets.

Isn't the bass in the OP "double stained" that is the first application of stain is allowed to penetrate deep into the wood and then the top is partially sanded back to remove the stain from the less porous areas. Then the whole body is retained again which gives a higher contrast effect on the grain. If so depending on what sort of finish the OP is intending to apply it might involve either a lot of sanding to remove the first deep stain or very careful sanding to only take off the second stain.

This would have been the ideal solution, but unfortunately it is not similar to the mobile look, but exactly the same as the mobile look, which while removing the unwanted right hand columns also removes a lot of navigation features that I find useful such as the breadcrumb trails.

More importantly how do I get rid of the whole Status Update and other columns on the right? They have nothing of interest to me in them and they take up valuable screen real-estate. The old version of the forum used to allow this.

From what I've read the 3-bolt micro-tilt system was originally developed to be used on Fender's acoustic guitar range where tilting the neck was the easiest user-friendly method of changing the action. For some reason it was decided to also apply it to the solid bodied guitar range, despite the fact that there should have been enough adjustment available at the bridge to make this unnecessary. It didn't actually get phased out at Fender until the early 80s, and I suspect that mostly due to fact that Fender was undergoing massive upheavals in management and trying to get the business back on track, which at the time meant re-creating instruments of the pre-CBS "glory days" and getting rid of most of the features developed during the 70s of which the 3-bolt neck was one. The reason for only 3 bolts on the micro-tilt system is that it is easier to adjust. You only need to slacken off the single bolt, the neck then pivots on the other two bolts while you adjust the micro-tilt, and when the adjustment has been made tighten up the single bolt again. In theory quick and easy. In practice it was really a solution in need of a problem. There should have been enough vertical travel in the saddles to allow for all the action adjustments required, and even if there wasn't, it's not too big a deal to take the neck off and add a shim.

On one string only?

If you'd read my post right at the beginning of this thread you'd know that the three bolt micro-tilt system was dropped because Fender's engineering practices and quality control did not allow the mechanism to be installed in such a way that let it to operate as intended without any unwanted side effects. If the neck pocket and heel of the neck have been machined properly a single bolt would be all that is required. It the mating surfaces are flat so that there is 100% contact and the neck is a snug fit in the pocket, the bolt is only there to hold the two parts together when under the tension of the strings and even then much of the force exerted on the joint will be tending to pull the neck tighter into the pocket. The bolt is only there counteract the lifting action of the string pull.