BassTractor

Yes indeed. Not only does it look complicated, but it also is complicated. BTW, I'm just writing in support of your notion. In principle MIDI's simple enough: send some commands to another unit, and that unit will obey. But then stuff happens. MIDI as it originally was conceived was way too simplistic, resulting in patchwork, brand specific functionality (very much against the very thought of MIDI, and meaning you have to patch control codes), updates and new generations. Then, manufacturers don't always give you a full MIDI implementation either, or it's simply not working well (A90 velocity for example). And this is all long before we start talking about the official brand specific functionality called SysEx. Yes, it's complicated, and a few looks at the forums at Gearslutz shows how even MIDI users with decades of experience sometimes tear out their hairs. When it simply works, it's luvverly. When it doesn't, it becomes a nightmare. But your approach of just sending note messages to the computer through the USB interface seems like a good way forward to start with. You'll pick up knowledge and insight as you go and read and experiment. Having both MIDI cables connected to the A90 can be done without the risk of a loop. It's just there so your computer can send control codes, or sequences of them, to the A90. For example: you could record what you're playing on the A90 (not the sound, but the MIDI codes), show this in computer software, edit that result, and send the edited recording back to the A90 so it will generate sound again as if you originally played perfectly. BTW, I'd love to help you, but I can't. After actually having taught the stuff in music college 😮, I've given up on MIDI after a stroke. My brain refuses to contain the knowledge. So in a weird way, I understand your situation very well. Good luck! Bert

Given your previous experience with Roundabout, I'd say start with The Yes Album. It showcases Yes' turning away from the simple songs based in classical Romantic era music, and it feels as a more coherent album than Fragile. After that, do try on Fragile for size. If Fragile does nothing or little for you, maybe try Going for the One. It's a bit prog and a bit lighter, in one way preparing the ground for their pop period (Owner of a Lonely Heart and the like - a song I lurv, BTW). But Fragile must be good, you know! When I'd bought it the day it came out, using my first regular wages, and proudly played Roundabout for my parents and sister, my dad exclaimed: "I hope I'll never have to hear that again". If that doesn't strike you as mathematical proof of its quality, you're a lost case. 😉

Lynched? Nah. You just explained us what Chris Squire quoted from in Yes' America. That Bernstein feller had nowt to do with it!

Note for note, BUT I've found there's time to be saved by playing the song or piece many times first so you get to know it so well that the note-for-note thing becomes somewhat of a theme-for-theme thing - depending on circumstances. BTW, I've done classical and jazz mostly, little pop or rock.

BTW, I've seen footage of the Union tour, and loved it.

That sounds like the 1991/1992 Yes "Union" tour to me, unless of course Anderson, Bruford, Wakeman, Howe had a lot of guests with them on tour with their evenings of Yes music, which was slightly before that.

Aye. Cringeworthy. Our bosses at Shell demanded we wore Esso shirts all the time. Class. 😐

I think you mean a snow globe:

Relayer never had the impact on me that Close to the Edge had, as it came out years later, but I think I might feel it's the better album of the two for me.

Fair enough, and I've expressed a similar view regarding its core sound, but at this point I think we should also mention that the DM6 has a modulation matrix that far exceeds anything any Juno ever spawned. 19 sources can modulate a whopping 120 destinations, even the built-in effects, making this an incredibly flexible synth within its core limitations and its price bracket. The only problem I have with this matrix is that the OP is not likely to be well-versed in synthesis (why else posting the question at all), and therefore would have a hard time extruding the power of the synth. The Moogs (and Behringer's D) are a lot straighter in this regard, offering a beast of a core sound from the off.

...and we have a winner: Karlheinz Stockhausen: "Gesang der Jünglinge". Incredibly hard to play on an electric bass. I'd seriously like to know whether this thread has a goal, an aim or a purpose.

Yes! A flexible and capable synth with great sound character, with the added advantage over a Model D that it has hundreds of patch storage places - just like the Miniak/Micron.

😁Not really, but maybe indeed. Initially I'd say: try and make a prioritised list of the things you would like to be able to do with it, and then check with people in the know what is possible. I'm aware that people new to synthesis will have Great Expectations. I'm really trying to say "Get a Miniak", but as the word "Moog" has a better sound to most, I expect that advice to go largely unnoticed. Fact remains that in many a setting, one would hardly notice the difference between a real Model D and a Miniak, even though the depth and rawness of the real deal has never been equalled, and certainly not by a virtual analogue. Then, the Miniak is polyphonic and can do nearly everything we know from the realm of analogue subtractive synthesis, and it will do stuff beyond that as well. If the OP wants to go Model D, then the Behringer Model D will do it all, with the drawback of a cramped panel. Great price though, at one tenth of a Moog Model D. Somehow I doubt the OP will be back, but in reply to the question I tried to state: it is a cheap solution that might cover some synth bass, and it will indeed do much more (it's good for pads for example), but don't expect it to do everything bass. BTW, the natural bass sound I once made was on a simple Korg MS-10 with equally weedy filter on one single VCO. Then, I was lucky.

Oh, and part of my decision to pick up the bass was that all my keyboard gear was so expensive and had such limited life spans. Then, in just three years I spent more on bass gear than I've spent on keyboard gear during my lifetime. 😮

It was a thread somewhere in General Discussion or Off Topic where the OP asked for a forum or section for discussing non-bass-related stuff. After some bewilderment on the part of the thread's readers, the OP mentioned said Macrotech, and several proposed that the OP could just start a thread in the Amps and Cabs section, which the OP didn't do immediately, so I did it as a little joke. So, it's a good amp, eh? 🙂 Edit: found it: https://www.basschat.co.uk/topic/347935-bass-not-just-guitars/

Discuss! 😉 To those who haven't read the relevant thread: this is a bad joke. I'm not in need of info about this thing. Don't even know what it is (but guess it's a PA amp).

Johann Sebastian Bach. He didn't play the bass guitar AFAIK, but he did write bass parts that defined the harmonic drive of the piece. I concluded that if you had a melody and a good bass part, then you essentially had all you needed. Then one Chris Squire appeared in my world...

Sorry! That was me on my Hammond, stirring in your frequency domain.

One could approach this from different angles, I think. First: IMHO there's a huge difference between asking for a bass part played on a synth, and asking for all the known synthbass sounds for covering hit songs. One train of thought would be that in order to make synthbass sounds, one needs a capable synth with at least two full-fledged VCOs and a good filter - preferaby 24 dB/oct. There's something to be said for that. If you're gonna cover known synthbass songs, you're looking at lotsa tracks that rely heavily on a Moog sound. In case, opting for a Phatty or Model D seems the natural thing to do. That does not exclude other synths, but in case it could be a longer, more winding road. There's another train of thought that says that any synth is usable for bass parts. I could agree - partly. I've happened upon a great, natural bass sound on a weedy 1 VCO synth with just an added pedal (don't remember, but probably a chorus type thing). In my mind it can be done, but on many synths one is looking at a narrower band of usable bass sounds. The DM6 specifically, whilst flexible and a great offering for the price, would be one of the last synths I'd think of for synthbass. That's due to its Juno inheritance and its 1.5 VCO instead of 2, and its presumed 12 dB/Oct filter. To my ears, the core sound of the DM6 is weedy, and one needs both programming skills (or good copied/bought patches) and effects. But yes, it can absolutely be done. Depending on your exact needs, I'd also think of a poly like the Akai Miniak AKA Alesis Micron. It's a powerhouse of a virtual analogue, and already in its presets it shows a whole world of sounds that basically is a walk through the history of analogue synths. With its 3 full oscillators as well as its vast amount of parameters, it's a machine that will do everything for you at a great price. This comes with its own drawback though: the tiny display is a nuisance, there are few knobs and buttons, and as a result programming the machine is hard - especially for beginners. I'd rather program it from an iPad or computer. Sound design software for these is available from different sources - both for IOS and Windows.

Indeed, and I think we might just be moving in the direction of technology taking care of that part, as in an app on your phone sharing your position with the ones you're talking to. In fact, my GPS unit already has a dedicated button for that function. I loves it. I can fall down from Preikestolen and send my position before even hitting the ground. Awesome! 😎

Ah! Interesting, and another step forward. Where TomTom and W3W in part dropped the ball (last statement I saw from TomTom was they still are working on the B2B segment), someone didn't. Do you have any idea which manufacturer is behind this? Garmin by any chance? Mind you, I'm no pro, and my enthusiasm towards certain uses is no indication of W3W's usablity as a system for other uses. I'm certain lots of brainy types are thinking loudly as we speak about many aspects. I'm just charmed with the idea that if I order a bass, I could state in the delivery options: "W3W: deliver.bass.here approach via best.bass.route." I've edited out a paragraph I hadn't been thinking through.

Oh, but that's OK, and a lot more than just OK. Earlier threads were only about the website, which is far less practical than this app. Well worth getting appdated about it (I'm sorry), and thanks for posting the OP! If you decide to look up the old threads, you'll find I gave four or five examples of self-experienced situations where this system is far better than traditional means. Me I loves it despite my remarks: I just want it to be perfec. (sic!)

Love a baritone, and thanks for posting about this one. Is it an ABT60E? I got bewildered as the web told me that has 21 frets, whilst this one has 20 if I count correctly. Do different versions exist maybe? Also, pix on the web mostly have a scratchplate, but it seems the bursts do not. Haven't delved into it yet. Anyway, how did you find the thick body? I'm wary of that aspect.

Guessing you're referring to me: thanks, but I just scratched the surface, and we did have a thread about W3W two years ago, and another one earlier this year, so my delving is not from today. I think it's very promising as a system, but still think it needs to be integrated in other systems, and there, I think, lies the bottleneck. For example: TomTom and W3W proudly announced cooperation in 2017 or 2018, before somehow forgetting everything about it, and going back on their promises. In general, there is the hard bit of negotiating systems like these in B2B environments due to conflicting interests.

BTW, and maybe interesting to users of TomTom GPS units, the Mapcode Foundation offer mapcodes that may be as short as 4 digits/letters, though often 6 - for example: 4H.JB. AFAIK, TomTom units accept these mapcodes. Of course, W3W was designed so the words can be pronounced and understood during a telephone conversation, but it offers its own drawbacks: for example, I found different addresses in the UK that differed by one letter only , e.g. squabble vs squabbles. Great, great potential nevertheless.