BigRedX

[quote name='NancyJohnson' timestamp='1496829281' post='3314083'] Reckon that if you want to go the backing track route the key words here are [i]discipline [/i]and [i]rehearsal[/i]. There is no recovery when things go awry. [/quote] Very much this. Practice and carry on practicing until you know all your cues and no one ever makes a mistake and then have contingencies for when it does do wrong.

Every band I've been in, that used back tracks the only person who could hear the click was the drummer. That way any push and pull in the song was generated by the drumming and the rest of the band played to that. Unless you either pre-programmed some "feel" into the click or were happy with everyone playing metronomically, I couldn't imagine how you could get a synchronised groove when everyone can hear the click. I certainly wouldn't want to play that way.

From the early 80s until about 10 years ago every single band I was in used some kind of pre-recorded or pre-programmed backing as part of our live sound. I've nearly always created my own backings, using Logic on the Mac since the early 90s, which gave me the most flexibility when it comes to play back solutions: I could use a laptop to replay the track direct from Logic; I could save the MIDI data as a standard MIDI file and play that back using a MIDI file player (my preferred solution was the one built in to the Akai samplers) controlling synths and samplers; I could mix the track down into stereo (or mono with a click track on the other channel) and run it from a CD player, Minidisk player or iPod. I have worked with bought backing tracks in the past, and unless you are planning on playing the song exactly as the recording, it is always best to go for MIDI tracks rather than recordings as it will allow you to load the track up into your DAW of choice and modify the arrangement to suit the way that you play the song. However I personally wouldn't bother with backing at all. For me the whole point of an acoustic duo is that it is re-interpretations of the songs that showcase the qualities two acoustic guitars and two voices. That's what I would be wanting to see and hear.

[quote name='bartelby' timestamp='1496754377' post='3313637'] It's a controller, why would it need midi in? [/quote] Anything that offers tempo synchronised effects needs to be able to act as a slave tempo device. Then you can choose the one with the most versatile and stable tempo control (like a DAW) to act as the master clock.

Tracks off [url="https://inisolation.bandcamp.com"]A Certain Fractal light by In Isolation[/url] which I need to have learnt for my first gig with them in less than 2 weeks time. Then I might have time to listen to all the albums I bought recently including the Sad Lovers And Giants boxed set...

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1496678387' post='3313161'] What caught my attention is the ability to load: [color=#000000][font=proxima-nova, sans-serif]"six simultaneous pedal effects"[/font][/color] With my Zoom B3n I can have just one "patch" (which can be a combination of several different effects) on at any given time. I can't switch effects on and off within a patch but only swap to a completely different patch. So, for example, if I wanted delay and then later to add in low octave, I would need to have two patches one for "delay" by itself and then a separate patch for "delay+octave". So the Zoom is, in effect, a series of single pedals only one of which can be played at any one time. Does anyone know if the Boss is the same as the Zoom in this regard, or is it providing the ability to have six different pedals coming in and out of the mix? Akin to having six dedicated single pedals any one of which can be switched on or off, as required? If so that would be a very significant enhancement in my books. [/quote] The effectiveness (sic) of being able to turn individual effects on and off in a patch (as opposed to setting up individual patches with the relevant effects on or off) very much depends on how this is achieved. IME with the Line6 BassFex and Shortboard foot controller, the individual on/off switches are on the second tier of the foot controller, which means that it is too unreliable for use live where I am just as likely the hit the patch memory foot switch immediately below the effect on/off switch that I was aiming for. I find it fine for rehearsal where I am trying out effect combinations, but almost totally useless for live performances.

There are some parameters that can benefit from a tweak mid-preformance. The obvious being cut-off frequency on a filter. Others you'll discover as you use the effects, although for many either a single on/off footswitch or a pedal will suffice. Regarding using the Zoom in conjunction with you looper, it would be a lot better if they could be connected together via MIDI, then you could get locked synchronisation between the loop speed and any time-based effects on the zoom. You'd also be able to control one device from the other which could make using the two in conjunction a lot more straight forward. I still the presence of proper MIDI sockets and implementation on multi-effects to put them in the good category.

Your Zoom B3n will do tap-tempo according to specification on the web site. You will need at external footswitch to enable it. You also appear to have tweak-able knobs for 4 parameters of 3 effects at any one time. The only thing missing is the effects loop(s).

A reasonably good multi-effects unit will have tap-tempo for any of the time based effects like delay/phase/flange/tremolo etc. which IME is the parameter you are most likely to need to change and is a far faster and more accurate way of changing it than any pedal dial. A really good multi-effects pedal will allow you to assign specific parameters to control knobs or pedals to allow you to tweak them mid-song. A really good multi-effects pedal would also have at least one switchable and assignable external loop to allow you to add an indispensable individual effects unit to any place in your signal chain and allow you to switch it in and out.

I've just had a reply from Righton Straps. Unfortunately the wide part of their strap is only 92 cm long, whereas I need something between 114 and 127 cm long, otherwise the wide part of the strap doesn't go over my shoulder and take the weight of the bass. 92 cm long for the wide part of the strap seems to be very short... Am I doing something wrong?

Thanks for you recommendations. I have had to send an enquiry to both manufacturers since they don't list all the relevant measurements on their site - especially the length of the wide part of the strap which IMO is essential since that is the bit that needs to extend comfortably over the shoulder of anyone using the strap. My current strap has the this part ending just at the point where my shoulder is taking the full weight of the bass and this coupled with the rather bulky strap length altering mechanism makes it very uncomfortable to wear now that my stage gear no longer includes a padded leather biker jacket. Which is why I'm wanting to replace my current strap. Also the Righton Straps site contact form reverts to Spanish if you make a mistake entering any of the information, which doesn't make it the easiest to fill in.

I'm looking for a new strap for my Warwick StarBass. I'd like one of those with a wide bit (at least 2" wide) and a skinny bit (1") where it attaches to the strap lock behind the heel. It needs to be at least 57" long from strap lock to strap lock (with some adjustment) Now here is the bit that I'm finding hard get - the wide bit needs to be at least 45" long (but no more than 50") so that it definitely covers my shoulder when the bass is strapped on. Nearly all the straps I can find have a shorter wide bit unless the whole strap is stupidly long. I would like a constant adjustment range so that I can get the bass at exactly the right height, but I don't want any big metal buckles on it. Plain black with some extra padding where the strap crosses the shoulder would be ideal. Any ideas?

It is my experience that unless the song comes to an awful grinding halt before you've reached the first chorus no-one in the audience will notice that anything is wrong. I've played a whole gig with the guitarist tuned about 20 cents sharp compared with the bass because of a tuner problem, and the only person who spotted anything was the drummer who was behind both amps and could her how appealing it sounded and kept telling us to tune up. Of course our tuners told us that we were perfectly in tune (just not with each other). Absolutely no one the audience noticed anything and we even picked up a rave live review in the local music scene blog...

[quote name='bazztard' timestamp='1496332996' post='3310641'] it isn't even about the music, it is about the PROCESS of multitracking that opened up a whole new way of making music for every single artist since . [/quote] But Les Paul had been using multitrack recorders for many years before Sgt Pepper....

[quote name='Chris2112' timestamp='1496366844' post='3310880'] If a Warwick had an oil finished neck, something has went wrong somewhere. They're supposed to be played, and the oils on your skin keep them supple. I have heard of people applying the body wax to the open grain of necks which creates a sticky clag. That is a costly mistake, you can tell straight away when someone has done it. [/quote] The Warwicks in question were brand new MiG basses on the Warwick stand at two separate trade fairs, so they should have been in absolute pristine condition and finished with whatever Warwick recommend. However without exception they were are horrible and sticky. In every case I picked up the bass, failed to be able play anything meaningful due to the stickiness of the neck put it back down again. The Warwick I own (a StarBass) has a gloss finish gold painted neck and I've never had any problems with stickiness.

The two drives, one for the system and one for data only works properly if you can ensure that they are on separate buses.

[quote name='ahpook' timestamp='1496225587' post='3309645'] I have a Fender soft case for my JC, fits a treat I'm pretty sure it's this one [url="http://www.gear4music.com/Guitar-and-Bass/Fender-Metro-Semi-Hollow-Bass-Guitar-Bag/XLT"]http://www.gear4musi...-Guitar-Bag/XLT[/url] [/quote] That's not cheap for what appears to be a standard gig bag. How comfortable are the straps? I might consider one of those when my Warwick one finally gives up.

The only thing I need when I'm answering a bass player wanted is to like their music on their Bandcamp and/or iTunes pages. Everything else can be sorted out after I've joined the band.

How tight a fit is that Peerless? I think the ES 335 has a larger body. Warwick make a gig bag to fir their StarBass. That would definitely be big enough. However IMO the quality is sadly lacking as mine is falling apart after only 2 years of moderate use. Plus the straps are rubbish.

The Epiphone Pro-VI might be a Gibson in almost everything but name, but then even the current Gibson model doesn't have that much in common with the original 1960s models - different pickups, hardware and IIRC the necks on the current model have more laminations than the originals... BTW Fender enthusiasts looking for a Thunderbird should keep an eye out for the Epiphone non-reverse re-issue, which is essentially a Fender Jazz in almost everything (construction, woods, pickups etc.) except the shape.

[quote name='Geek99' timestamp='1495837512' post='3307054'] Does anyone have an opinion on these ? Tried one in Matlock music shop today and was quite taken - but not enough to bust my quota [/quote] Which version? Epiphone currently make 3 different Thunderbirds that have little in common in terms of construction and electronics. There's more to a bass guitar despite gin than just the shape.

[quote name='Andyjr1515' timestamp='1495727820' post='3306190'] series with opposite magnet poles on two of them (bit like a deconstructed humbucker) [/quote] If all the coils are different impedances in order to balance the string volume will it be completely humbucking?

That I like the music. IMO pretty much everything else can be fixed later once I'm in the band, but if I don't like the music then it's definitely not for me.

You need to tackle one "problem" at a time or you'll never get a set up you are happy with. Get the bridge in the correct place so that the notes produced by fretting the strings at the 12th fret and their harmonics at the same position are the same, and then (and only then) if the notes in the first and second fret positions are still out of tune have a look at the nut.

There's nothing wrong with either recording all at the same time live in the room or building up a track instrument by instrument, or any method in between. The trick is to find the way that suits the band the best. There are different skills a band needs to be able to make the best of whichever method they choose. If you are going to record live the band needs to be so well rehearsed that they can nail the song in a couple of takes. Alternatively if you are going to build up the track an instrument at a time each musician need to be able to play their part without necessarily being able to hear cues from the other instruments that they might normally rely on. Both are skills that need to be worked on long before the band sets foot in the studio. Whichever method you choose, I wouldn't even consider recording to tape any more. The downsides, especially with multi-track tape, more than outweigh any (imagined) sonic benefits. I see too many studios who've installed a tape machine for that "old school" vibe, but either haven't got the skills or can't afford to keep it properly maintained and aligned, and don't have the rack of Dolby A modules that you need to keep tape hiss in check. Doing anything other than pressing record at the start, and stop at the end of your perfect take is a complete hassle and very time consuming. Things that takes seconds on a DAW like setting punch in and out points for an overdub or removing an unwanted noise at the beginning of an otherwise perfect recording will take minutes at best using tape (out of time you as a band are paying for) and if the engineer gets it wrong there is no undo button. You may find, like I have several times in the past, having to go back and do the whole track again because the wrong thing as been inadvertently wiped. On top of that, if you aren't going to simply copy all the tape tracks into your DAW once tracking is over (in which case your studio might as well just invest in a good tape saturation plug in), the studio is going to need racks of outboard gear to process everything. Even if you do at lot of it at tracking the studio is going to need a compressor/limiter and gate on every mic at the very least. All that hardware doesn't come cheap and really if the studio cares about the sound they are going to want quality outboard with valves and opto-compressors. A handful of Behringer MDX2600s isn't going to cut it. And unless the studio has a very expensive analogue automated mixing desk, any mix is going to have to be done live, which can be as much a performance as playing the song in the first place. Also making adjustments to that mix at a later date will involve setting it up from scratch all over again. You had better hope that the studio took notes of every channel setting if you want to do this. Having gone through the rigmarole of multi-track tape recently, the only way I'd consider recording to tape again would be if was with a brilliantly rehearsed band going live direct to a mono or stereo master. In that case the performance of the producer/engineer on the desk would be just as critical as that of any of the musicians - perhaps more so since they won't have had the luxury of weeks of practice to learn the song and what needs to be done when it terms of riding the faders and adjusting the outboard as the band plays. Having said all that I don't necessarily see a studio recording as an excise in trying to achieve perfection, but at the same time I don't want to be left with errors in the recording that could and ought to have been fixed. For me multi-tracking and using a DAW to capture the performance(s) gives the ultimate in flexibility. The things that you do want to change can be done quickly and easily. Finally, of the [url=https://terrortones.bandcamp.com]four Terrortones releases[/url], 3 were recorded as live performances with a few vocal, guitar and theremin overdubs and one was built up one instrument at a time. I would defy anyone to pick out which was the assembled recording.