BassTractor

[quote name='JellyKnees' timestamp='1360684795' post='1974624'] Ours is an anagram of mine and the singer's surnames [/quote] Hey Job, Sorry to see you didn't use your christian name as well! Coat: check PS Yup, i know best, bert

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1360722739' post='1975518'] I'm pretty sure there's someone here on the forum who can remember VE Day. [/quote] Not me. I was still hiding in a safe cabin hidden in the swamps down in Brabant. No papers either, you know. But they did tell me when I came out some decades later to try and derail another train. Yup, a hero I am.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1360697764' post='1974993'] I certainly wouldn't want to suggest I have any special musical knowledge and am more than happy to be pointed towards a methodology for quantitatively analysing music in order to measure its artistic merit. [/quote] Oh, but then we're on a ledger here. I did not write, or intent to indicate, that music alltogether is a quantitative science. What I do want to write though, is that music is far more quantitative than often believed by those without formal education. The fun fact[s]oid[/s]lett here is that they themselves will use formal, semi-formal or attempted formal arguments to put down music they dislike, and will try to use similar to stand up for music they do like. "That stupid, repetitive two chord sh*t! My daughter wrote more advanced stuff when she was five!" "Oh, man! Listen to those chord changes. So inventive with these polyrhythms! This is deep, man!" [quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1360697764' post='1974993'] I can imagine there has been loads of work on the psychology of music, but psychology itself isn't the most quantitative science. [/quote] Agreed, and see above. [quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1360697764' post='1974993'] I've no doubt musical composition can be analysed in all sorts of ways but if the essence of a 'good' song that would be enjoyed by millions of people really could be measured then there would be a computer programme somewhere churning out hit after hit and making a fortune for the record companies. [/quote] Hm. I don't see this is necessarily so. A game of GO (Chinese board game that's easily learnt but very hard to master, often compared to Chess) can easily be analysed, but the very best GO computer software today is still lousy at playing, effectively playing at mediocre to reasonable club player level. Similarly, it's far easier to analyse an existing song and include some of the "magic" in the analysis, than to set up some formal rules and have a computer churn out "good" stuff. The computer program lacks the evaluation capability that humans have, and does not have a composition process consisting of listening back and changing over time either. More importantly, the essence of a "good" pop song has both quantifiable and non-quantifiable (for now) parts, even though analysable afterwards, but I would also put forward the idea that EVERY pop artist that has ever been hugely popular in all kinds of circles, has some formal bits very much in order. Or, to put it a little differently: formal qualities are a necessity to become hugely popular across markets. The Beatles are one of those bands. I think Queen are as well (I have zero Queen albums, mind, so not talking as fanboy). [quote name='Lord Sausage' timestamp='1360697794' post='1974994'] You ain't a native speaker, bloody hell! Your post are some of the best on here! [/quote] Thank you. That was very nice to read, indeed, and a great support. Must be doing something right then. Trying to explain what I mean: When I write, apart from often making mistakes, I can choose how much time I use on looking things up, and I can form sentences that only use the words and ways of expressing that I feel comfortable enough with. When I read, however, part of this freedom is removed, and often stuff does go over my head. In sum, I'll often look more able than I really am. OK, this has cost a lot of time and energy, and I'm tired and not capable of rereading and judging what I wrote. Will come back later and change where necessary, rather than not posting now. best, bert

Hey Liam, Firstly: congrats on finding a non-taken name like that. You's a bit of genius, yeah? Secondly: welcome! I'm sure we have the space for a drummer/guitarist/bassist/keyboardist - just come alone, without any weapons. (Coincidentally, I'm a keyboardist gone future bassist who tries to also learn the guitar and the drums. Life's great, eh?) Anyway, I hope you'll thrive on our little planet. Don't let our harsh jokes about drummers get the better of you. Just remember they're all deserved. Enjoy! best, bert

[quote name='tedmanzie' timestamp='1360692634' post='1974856'] You can stick your [i]sharp diminished 7"[/i] where the sun don't shine!! [/quote] Hey! You've been talking to my ex!! Stop that!!! best, bert

[quote name='tedmanzie' timestamp='1360690935' post='1974814'] Interesting and well put. Debating whether the songs are art or not is a red herring in my opinion. For me The Beatles work celebrates the simple joy of music. That's why it was and is still so popular and will more than likely remain that way for hundreds, maybe thousands of years to come . . . . . . (post ends with E major chord from Day In Th Life) . . . .. [/quote] Thanks. The red herring in case was not intended as a red herring, but I can see how it can function like that. Great remark about celebrating the joy of music. I will indeed enjoy my Beatles for thousands of years to come, and will continue to be moved to tears. E Major?! Demn you! I hate E Major! You only wrote that to provoke me! Clown! best, bert

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1360689462' post='1974765'] My contention is that none of those statements are correct because they are all based on the false premise that things such as "quality of compositions" can be measured. If there is no quantitative way to measure (or 'rate') something, then it cannot be said to be over-rated, or under-rated for that matter. [/quote] . I don't understand how that relates to the part you culled from my post. Then again, I'm not a native English speaker, so it may be perfectly logical. As to your claim on the measurability of "quality of compositions", I can only say that I do not know what exactly you know about this stuff, but I do know that people who are not formally educated in composition or musicology, do tend to under-rate (haha) how much of a composition is measurable and rateable. Music psychology is part of analysis, and we know quite much about how music works and why. The exception here is new art, for which adequate theory normally has been developed in hindsight - though exactly that aspect is on the return these days. best, bert

The main problem in this thread, IMHO, is that people do not express their views in a very precise fashion, and that others easily - I'd say way too easily - misunderstand what is being said, resulting in lots of broad statements supported by lots of straw men, defensiveness and maybe even vindictiveness. Simple example (not actually drawn from specific posts) of the interpretation bit: "The Beatles are over-rated" (OK, that resembles Bilbo, but from here on it's constructed) Now to me this immediately means the following: "There's a discrepancy between the quality of their compositions, musicologically speaking, and the adolation they've received for those compositions." To others it seems to mean: "I am a genius, and The Beatles certainly were far from as influential on music as art form as people think they were." Whilst others seem to think it means: "The Beatles certainly were far from as influential on popular culture as people think they were." Who is to say whose interpretation is correct if one doesn't ask the right questions? FWIW, I was the 8 year old boy who tried to explain to the grown ups in the sixties that "She Loves You" was a very simple song, and that they'd better start listening to Bach, Beethoven and Brahms. Then, Rubber Soul and Revolver made me more "mild". Yup! Fast forward: Some of the Beatles' songs are amongst the songs I love most of everything, like Blackbird and The Long and Winding Road. But I'd never bought a Beatles album before "Let It Be - Naked" when it was on sale, but now much enjoy my CD copies of their latter years albums (starting with Rubber Soul and Revolver), except Sgt. Pepper, which I can't stand probably only because it was much overplayed in my circles when I was young. I can't and won't deny the influence The Beatles had on the popular culture of several generations. Musicologically speaking, I think they provided nice to awesome pop songs, some of which were among the best that pop music has brought forward, but art it ain't. I'm here using my Dutch definition of art, as in that only the very best, most profound, art-developing music is considered art. They have influenced popular music indeed, but certainly have not influenced Krzysztof Penderecki or Iannis Xenakis, to name a few. The Beatles would certainly not be able to explain the inner working of those composers' works, whilst [i]those[/i] composers on the other hand hand wouldn't want to explain the Beatles' works out of sheer boredom. BTW, McCartney's "classical" work is hardly classical, and at any rate very dilettantish. Before I get arrested: NO, I do NOT think that formal matters are the only thing to look at when talking about music. But I do think that exclamations like "Over-rated" do tend to actually relate to the formal side of things. As to the discussion on "who's gonna judge", some of you may be surprised to learn how much of music is actually quantative, and there will always be people who are better than others in knowing how exactly a certain song or piece works, to which degree it reaches the goals it set out for itself, and why it has the impact it has. As an example, I presented a short piece totally different than anything to my composition teacher. He immediately told me about the formal flaws in the working out of the implicit rules that I myself had set up. He immediately saw what I still can't see 30 odd years later. Well, this certainly became longer than I intended. Condescending? I don't think so. I tend to have a lot more respect for other people than those others have for me, and I do kinda know what I'm talking about here. I think i would be condescending to [b]not[/b] share my thoughts. best, bert Edit: speling and clarity

. Twas surely well done to apologise, homer, but why immediately continue with a post that essentially says that you are right and the others wrong, only to finish it off with: [quote name='niceguyhomer' timestamp='1360672446' post='1974245'] there’s a small group of idiots (not you Bilbo) who drag this place down to the point where it’s just not worth taking part anymore [/quote] I don't get this way of proceeding. In fact, i feel it's another attempt at putting yourself in the right, and without having an open dialogue. Should we all guess whether it's us? What have the idiots done to drag the place down? What can be done to reverse this process? As you and I never had any contact or dispute as far as I know, allow me to come with an observation as a bystander: For at least half a year, but probably longer, your messages have come across to me as frustrated and aggressive - not as constructive towards the level of communication on here. So in my mind, your have been contributing to the downslide your describe, not trying to hinder it. A farewell is helping nobody. If you have enjoyed BC previously, and I assume you have, then please stay and be a part of the solution. best regards, bert edit: spelingue

Leen, I'll take the soon available shredder spot.

Yeah, farewell! In the unlikely case you do manage to return: Welcome back! Partake in the banter and in the occasional exchange of info, and generally enjoy! best, bert

Hey Houn, Welcome! In my 1.3 years as a future bass player, and a couple of decades as a bass lover, I've never even heard about the DiPintos. Any good? Don't be shy, and feel welcome to show us a pic of it. Also, please share some knowledge and some stories from your couple of decades. Enjoy the site! best, bert

[quote name='drTStingray' timestamp='1360606280' post='1973257'] Indeed they are excellent - but sound not like a Stingray at all. [/quote] Some people on the MM forum wrote that the single H Bongo is like a bigger, fatter, rounder single H StingRay, and still in StingRay territory. Would you agree with such a description? BTW, pics of the Women, Dr T, or it didn't happen. best, bert

Hey Steve, Air! Finally air! Welcome to the surface. However did you manage indeed. Anyway, I hope you'll thrive among those that float. Sorry you'd go for Music Man. Not very good that stuff. But we do need to see that Pangborn indeed. Yes thanks for that pic. Enjoy! best, bert

Hallo Gilberto Welkom op BassChat! Je hebt leuke dingen in die lijst: MB, SWR, P, J, TNT, J5 ... wauw! Eksplosief, hoor! Ik hoop dat je het hier leuk vindt. Heel aardige mensen hier, dus dat zal wel lukken. Garoets! besto, berto

Hey man, Welcome! Enjoy your stay, and share your knowledge with the noobs please. best, bert

,olleH

Ah. Thanks. Never mind then. Didn't like that low frequency anyway. BTW, twas too tachy/glossi as well. (Thanks, Wikipedia!)

Is your hedhegog vulva for sale?

[quote name='Lord Sausage' timestamp='1360353765' post='1969303'] I don't go in for all this muscle memory stuff, it's just the brain. [/quote] Of course! I've known that forevaaah. I thought. ... and what happened two or three days ago? Some or other scientific report seems to indicate that they've now found some or other form of memory in ... wait for it ... our muscles! Not that I'd just easily accept that that would explain musicians' abilities, but at least it would be interesting to read more about it. best, bert

... and details, please?

Pics, please?

[quote name='afterimage' timestamp='1360442347' post='1970612'] North west. [/quote] Have a look at a map, you effing Scouser! best, bert

[quote name='Lfalex v1.1' timestamp='1360441314' post='1970601'] It's superb. [/quote] Do you mean to say it can sound like a StingRay, or that it will fulfil the Ray's functionality? Or? That, and did you really have to say that just two (2) days after I received my expensive Ray 5 fretless? best, bert