BassTractor

[quote name='Coilte' timestamp='1382361364' post='2251139'] I doubt that many classical (or other music types) musicians would be efficient at playing say....Mingus, but doubt that a jazz player would have any major problems playing other music forms. [/quote] I'm not confident that I understand this text, but whatever you may mean, IME: - most classical players stink at jazz, and are mostly very aware of this. - most jazz players stink at playing classical, whilst thinking they do a good job. No time to go into detail right now.

Reminds me of this saxophone player who dies and, against all tradition, signs and expectation, finds himself allowed into Heaven. He even gets to play in the Heavenly Big Band. Great players, great scores, inspiring solos ... he's having a great time. Then suddenly he notices this slim trumpet player in a tight cut Italian suit, soloing, with his back to the audience, on a stopped horn. Our saxophone player asks who the Hull that is. - That? Oh, that's God. He thinks he's Miles Davis!....

[quote name='Anthony Welington'] [i][color=#333333]"Victor Wooten has the biggest toolbox of any bass player I've ever heard or 'evaluated'! And I've checked MOST of them out. And Victor's has one of the BIGGEST imaginations out there too![/color][/i]" [/quote] . Bah! [color=#ffffff].[/color] "Victor Wooton Ain't So Great".

I get the impression that this thread better than we've had before pinpoints what one is talking about here, with "theory" existing as a backdrop even if one doesn't explicitly think in theoretical terms, and with delightfully little (or none) of this "You theorists only follow some rules. I however am free!" bollocks. My take is the same, I think: Man has developed musical sensitivities through the ages, and one slowly has reached a level of agreeing on how stuff by large works on the human ear. Normal, tradional theory, in my mind is just a reflection of some shared and agreed-on insights about how the overtone spectrum governs what the human ear likes, and how the human ear likes it. Since music is all around us, and our ears thusly are trained all the time, in my mind we're rather musical people, and I think I see this confirmed when so many people love for example Pink Floyd, The Beatles or Queen - artists who do not belong in the realm of the most unmusical music there is. The following may be too local for Brits to get a good impression of it, but I'll take the chance, as I think it exemplifies this more: A popular and simple style of music here in Norway and in Sweden is what is called "dansband" (dance band as it were). It's not about cover versions of popular music, but small orchestras playing their own songs with a strong and recognisable 4/4 beat and very simple lyrics, melodies and chord structures. Nothing there to expand one's brain by. "Modulation" for example is often achieved by simply repeating the same structure in the new key. Now, in this setting, the most popular band by far is the one that IMNSHO is the most professional in musical terms. Their songs float like a piece by Mendelssohn, and these songs are flawless if one analyses them with classical theory in mind. Simple, mind, but flawless in the light of what they try to achieve. Gazillions of other bands exist in these circles and with this specific musical style. What most of them share is a lack of success AND compositions that are as leaky as a house without a roof. This, to me, is a great example of my notion that people are not unmusical, and do indeed take part in this shared knowledge base - also on this simple level. So yes, theory is there, even if you're not aware or think you don't use it. Each musical choice is a choice that in some way comments on or reflects our shared experience. One of the things that make Swedish prog band "von Zamla" so exciting to me, is their strong sense about exactly how much they can break conventional rules without landing in chaos. Their music tickles and amuses, and IMO is deeply musical at the same time. They confirm the rules by defying them - or rather: defying is probably the wrong word here. How about "bending the rules"? (If by any chance you're interested, look up Samla Mammas Manna / Zamla Mammaz Manna / von Zamla. They're essentially the same band under three different names.)

[b]D'ohCrikeyStrewth![/b]

Whilst the bass obviously is the best instrument ever for a solo, I vehemently hate this approach where people are asked to learn gazillions of standard licks. So many solos are marred by these safe havens that most of the time have nothing to do with the melodies and the development within the song. I'm not interested to hear fragments that could have been part of just about any song. I wanna hear some inspired reflection of what [b]this[/b] song is about. My own approach is like this: play some weird notes in order or as a chord. Check what you just have done. Now make something musical with that, whatever it was - - you always can. I always remember a remark made by some musician on tv about the difference between musicians and others, that musicians can pick up any instrument - any instrument - and do something musical with it, despite maybe never even having touched such an instrument before. Now of course that "something musical" is hardly gonna be a good funk groove in a certain style. But it will still be musical. Me, I rather listen to a drummer investigating the violin this way, than to a sax soloist doing "Four Brothers" with pre-rehearsed fragments of emptiness. OK, so maybe I exagerated just a trifle. Not much though. .

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1382190052' post='2249078'] it's also entertainment. [/quote] [color=#ffffff].[/color] ... or, as some numpties would call it, "having fun and courting the audience". Please keep doing it. It keeps us down here on the ground where we belong.

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1382139218' post='2248698'] Why did she do that when she's got backing vocalists there who would have sounded far better singing the harmony? [/quote] Because music is not only art. It is also having fun and courting the audience. I liked this song, Sensitive chords, nice atmosphere, and lovely how she does this what I suppose is overtone stuff only for a few seconds rather than keeping at it and ruining the song. BTW, what's the fat synth? Bassist's synth pedal I presume?

Just in case someone is interested in these: I bought the Camps thin-body, and can't put it down! That cost me a sleepless night. I know that a good full bodied concert guitar is "grander", but I just simply love this light, clear sound and its sonority. It simply has a great sound, and is sooo much better than your typical cheap guitar. Also, it's the first classical guitar I have played that, to me, feels comfortable even when I'm playing it sitting relaxedly in a comfy sofa. Win win.

Welcome, Nick! That intro of yours was a great read, in my humblest of opinions of course. Brought a smile to me face at any rate. You didn't do too badly with the Vox. It's worth £87,63, but I'll take it off your hands for 90 quid. Fingers crossed. "Bassist"? Wouldn't know, me, but then I don't have the Brits' sensitivities and sensibilities. Here in Norway no-one would say "bass player". It's just called a "bassist" or "bass guitarist", so please don't behead me when/if I use these terms. What I do know though is that there are some people on BC who hate the use of the word "that" for people. Yup, there's some bassists that feel that way. Anyway, good to make your acquaintance. Enjoy the threads in the forums in the sections of this forum. best, bert

Hey Andie, Welcome! Nice introduction too. Enjoy! best, bert

Hey Colin, Welcome! Skin bashers is good. They is fun to be with. Enjoy the site! best, bert

Hey Dev, A slightly less unofficial welcome here then. Good to see you were able to post. My take is it's better to leave General Discussion for general discussion, as stated in that section, and rather post Amps&Cabs questions in the Amps&Cabs forum. Not for Forum Nazi reasons, but because: When people later want to do a search after the thread you post, then they are likely to search in the Amps&Cabs forum in the Gear section, and hence will miss it. If instead they do a search on the whole of BC to cover all bases, then the search often finds shitloads of For Sale ads, and this clutters the search results. (Me personally, I keep not understanding why forum owners (not just on here, but everywhere) would put "General Discussion" or "Everything Else" sections near the top of the list, where everyone is gonna post no matter how well though out the structure of te site is.) OK, rant over. Anyway, enjoy the info and the banter! BTW, you're not alone. We have several guys from Ayrshire here. Maybe they'll come to your thread and confess. Oh, and I know nothing of Eden - garden or otherwise. best, bert

Hey Dev, It got posted alright as you saw, but I think you'd be better served if you tried again, starting a new thread in the Amps&Cabs forum in the Gear section. Likely few people are reading this thread here, but many will read the thread titles down there. That said, yes, it's a good idea to connect speakers to the Eden. (Sorry, couldn't resist. ) Oh,and welcome! best, bert

It may have been an RBX270 or too expensive RBX170. Good stuff, and safe buys. Active pre-amps tend to avoid hum, and can boost as well as reduce. Their output is not necessarily higher, even though people often think that. Output impedance would probably be lower. Though there's a huge difference between a large hollow-body and a tiny Steinberger cricket bat, in this case I think size differences with other solid bodies matter less than placement of components, and in that respect, strap length can soon be a very important factor depending on belly size amongst other things. Experiment and learn. Oh, and you need a good amp. In your case an Orange. The model is called Utange.

Short read: Anyone know anything about the Spanish guitar brand Camps? Reportedly (by web and shop) their guitars are good for the price, and they have solid wood in all parts. Long read: Expecting to walk out from the shop with a Yamaha classical guitar like the GC 192C or rather one with a pre-amp like the NCX 700 or the thin NTX 700, I was surprised about how shop personel kept telling how I could save a lot of money and rather buy a Camps. Camps are a total unknown to me, and I seem to struggle to find any good info on ze webz. I was quite charmed by a very thin (70 mm) Camps guitar called NAC-1, which had a light tone with clarity and relatively long sustain whilst retaining sonority - fitting to my purposes, which mainly is learning to play the guitar, and eventually sofa playing of classical music and accompanying the occasional song with guitar strumming. It has a Fishman pre-amp and a cutaway - two capacities I appreciate. Its regular, thick version is the same price, and though it is a better guitar, I will prefer the thin one for ergonomics and ease of handling. The alternative, a thin (90 mm IMS) Yamaha NTX 700 surprisingly left me quite underwhelmed, but I must say that seemed due to bad strings first and foremost. The body did have the will to reverberate. I must guess it's too expensive for shops to put new good strings on every guitar, but boy... The Camps looked technically well-built, but it did have some rough edges (it's an unlacquered guitar, so no lacquer will hide anything) and part of the construction was hidden behind black paint - which is as large an alarm bell as I can find. The nut was of a weird material that I assume must be some form of artificial bone stuff. Sadly it protruded slightly from the neck, but I'm willing to sand that down, or can live with it as it is. Neck and action seemed perfect, fretwork, though not super, seemed more than good enough. I tried hurting myself on the frets's ends as a test, but failed. As said, its sound charmed my socks of, and it was roughly 200 quid cheaper than the NTX. What the cohabitation? BTW, it also plays easier than our Yamaha GC 172C, which I bought like 8 or so years ago, and which I think is a perfectly adequate, good guitar. A guitar that plays easier than that one is good in my book. So for the time being, it seems like a good sounding, well-built but slightly rough instrument. I guess I can live with that. I guess all I'm after is confirmation from you that Camps guitars are a safe buy, and that I'm not likely to see the bridge come off.. or the lid for that matter. Anyone know anything about them?

You're lucky I'm a psychic. It's called something like a Foreda or something. I'd need a picture of your naked girlfriend to extract more detail.

Thanko mucho for posting this which I think gives an good idea about what the 900 is. That said: you bastard made me long even more after the delivery date of mine! Oh, and [b]andyonbass 9/10[/b]

[quote name='Lord Sausage' timestamp='1381694733' post='2242540'] It's the other way for me. It increases my joy! [/quote] Yeah. Trying to be slightly less longwinded than I tend to be, I in fact worded it wrongly. It reduces my joy when I loved the composition to begin with. It increases my joy when I disliked the composition. BTW, I'm not talking about general knowledge of theory. I'm talking about minute analysis of one composition - analysis that would involve writing out the whole composition by ear, then analysing it in its minute details, and writing down a reflection of that analysis. The immense amount of time used on a composition this way, and later "hearing" not my joy but my remembrance of the analysis... that is what ruined it for me. General knowledge of theory did augment my general appreciation for the work of a composer and for certain works, but appreciation is not the same as deep emotional experiences when hearing certain music. I prefer that my ears just hear how great a piece is, rather than that an analysis tells me it is great.

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1381686404' post='2242328'] If I was working with a tutor & he said my technical execution needed working on then I'd probably listen to him. If he told me my composition needed working on, and I was perfectly happy with what I was composing, then I would probably ignore him as his thoughts on my compositions would be coloured by his own likes & dislikes. [/quote] In case, I'd guess both tutors have their reasons - reasons they would (should?) be able to verbalise. If my playing tutor says my technique needs working on, he'll also tell me what aspects of it as well as how I should work on them. The composition tutor would do the same, explaining what choices I've made and how they will work on the audience. As a simple example, finishing the song with a IV - I is not very rock 'n' roll, but could fit perfectly in old style church music. So if I use a IV - I in a rock song, the tutor could call this a weak change, not meaning it is bad, but meaning it has a weak type of character - call it soft if you want. I could still keep it as it is, and might have good reasons for it (rational or musically emotional), but at least I'd be slightly more in the know than the minute before. This hooks in on the eternal debate about how much of a composition is subject to analysis and criticism, and how much of it is beyond that realm. I've stated before here on BC that many people will be surprised about how much of a composition in fact is quantifiable, analyseable and the subject to reasoned evaluation. Don't take me wrong: I don't like analysis. Knowing the inner workings of a great composition reduces my joy over it. That dislike however, does not mean that analysis is not a tool. My composition teacher would have to use it as a tool to even start commenting on my choices.

Good going, John! Practice amps will never go out of style, even when they're top makes. ;-) Have they told you what model that bass is?

Just as a side remark, as I don't have an opinion: before "In Rainbows" was released on CD, Thom Yorke mentioned in an interview that the revenue of the downloads and the pre-ordered box set together were such that the band had made considerably more money on this direct sale than they'd made totally with any previous album distributed the regular way. I know what he said, but don't know whether he spaketh truthe.

At 12.58 AM, Lowender posted this: [quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1381618698' post='2241580'] You're probably right. [/quote] At 01:49 AM, Lowender changed this into: [quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1381618698' post='2241580'] You're probably right. But that's just YOUR opinion. : ) Tell you what, since you're familiar with the piece and the players execution was so void of musicality, record 16 bars of it yourself and let everyone hear how it REALLY should be done. I'll look forward to that -- as I'm sure everyone else will as well. [/quote] At 04:51 (edited 04:52 AM), Lowender followed up with: [quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1381632705' post='2241666'] I'm offering him the chance to back up his big words. So far...nothing. [/quote] This is really all the data we need to have. Our brains can do the rest of the legwork... However, just to humour Lowender just slightly: [quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1381632705' post='2241666'] I assume this gentleman is a musician and is claiming the musician in question is inferior. And doing so imperiously. If one makes that claim, I think they should be able to back it up. I said in a previous post I could copy Victors part in that song. And I didn't say it was crap. Bass Tractor is pulling a pure puss move -- attempting to bully me by accusing me of being a bully -- when all I did was state an opinion and never...NEVER did I attack anyone here. Bass Tractor however feels entitled to call me names. It's lame. It's weak. And I'm not buying it. I think he needs to take a deep look at himself and try to understand what his issues might be that makes him so insecure. At any rate, I'm offering him the chance to back up his big words. So far...nothing. [/quote] As written before, initially it would be far from me to criticise that performance. I understand and appreciate the context as well as the attempt. I understand the technical requirements to the player. Had I been in the audience, I would have been smiling from ear to ear, and would applaud this with warmth ("warmth" should be in the dictionary, btw, just like "coldth" and "calmth"). However, the clip was used as an example of a type of greatness that would put VW in the shadow. Now, while I do not specifically appreciate VW, or know his work for that matter, the greatness claim was followed by a claim about this performance's musicality. This is where I disagreed, first politely and calmly, and avoiding a discussion of Lowender's way of behaving on an open forum. Then stuff happened, and I felt the need to up it a notch, still trying to avoid a discussion on Lowender, but it was getting very hard at that point, as Lowender virtually pushes his opponents into certain areas. Then more stuff happened, and I felt the bullying (specifically the claim that xilddx lacks Lowender's exquisite capabilities in the ears department) needed to be met. OK. Now for part 2. I do not think my insecurity is the issue here. Not that I do not have insecurities, but I'm always quite open and simplistic about them. I may be lame and weak and all kinds of other ugly things, but all of that would not change the way Lowender tries to rule this thread. As to me being a musician, for reference and clarity purposes, I told about my musical background in my second post in this thread. Yes, I was once a musician, at a semi-international level and within classical and new classical music. Yes, I did teach in music college. I never claim that I am right because of that background, as I'm far too intelligent to say such a stupid thing, but I am sometimes telling people this so they are aware where my texts may stem from. As a bassist, I'm just a noob who can't manage to play something like "Take a Pebble" or other ELP related stuff. This inability however does not guarantee that I am deaf. You know what? It's now 15:40 PM (yes, I know), and ... so far ... nothing! [quote name='Skol303' timestamp='1381662875' post='2241887'] Let's try to keep the opinions here focused on musicianship rather than each other, eh? [...] let's allow a little room for differences of opinion. [/quote] Looking at the whole thread an how it was developing, I disagree, but I will respect your wish and will try to follow that lead. To do that, I could also edit my previous posts, but since that would put others' reaction in a strange light, I think it's best if the posts are left alone.

Thanks for posting that. I'd almost forgotten that lot totally. Went after it right away on iTunes, only to find out Minnie Riperton is on that record, showing a quite different side than on her "Lovin' You" from some years later.

[quote name='JapanAxe' timestamp='1381336848' post='2237840'] What about using it in a good mood at home!? [/quote] That remark needs to be pinned somewhere. This novel concept has great promise! I'm telling ya! BTW, just ordered a 900 myself, and will try and report when I'm in a good mood. May take a while though.