paul_c2

The only real way is to control what's within your power to control. If this means having a sound engineer of your own, so you CAN control the mix (and overall volume) during the gig, and who understands the needs of your band and yourselves more accurately than "random student wannabe sound engineer" (I'm sure some of them will go on to make good sound engineers) then that's what to do. If this isn't possible - I appreciate it may be a step up too far - then stopping briefly to solve the technical issues, WITHOUT annoying the audience, is the way to go. Certainly I'd try a brief pause and chat with the relevant, without asking/moaning on-mic, before anything else. I wouldn't go buying more and more kit, if the issue is the way the existing kit you use (albeit the venue's) is being controlled.

That was going to be my second suggestion. Bass solos just about the right length, don't want to over-egg the pudding after all.

The Who 5:15 by Thunderfingers of course:

You didn't make a mistake though? Unfortunately, shopping nowadays especially online is often based simply on being the cheapest priced, so companies will do anything to cut costs. 95% of the time it works out for you and me as a consumer, sometimes things like this happen though.

...........and that's the river. If you're angry, but not sufficiently (or you want/need it enough) to actually cancel the order and deny them your money, then they've "won", at least this one sale. Without naming and shaming, there's no negative impact on the company (and even with, its probably marginal). Personally I'd try to never put myself in a position I "need" something that much that customer service below my expectation will be tolerated, simply to obtain the item.

If you get money for it, regularly, its - by definition - semi-professional and a job/occupation. If you didn't get paid, then sure its amateur and safely in "hobby" territory. It would depend on the type of band and gigs you did, this kind of thing has come up before where people assume things without asking, and in fact there's plenty of different variations on basschat. I suspect those who know they're semi-pro, would know themselves if they ought to declare it or not on their insurance.

I just checked on Money Supermarket and they have the question "Besides xxxxxxxxxxxxxx do you have another job?" and if you look at the info box, it paraphrases this as "paid work". On another one (Confused.com) it asks "Do you have another occupation?". I would have thought if you receive money for something, then it would be widely interpreted as "another job" or "another occupation" regardless of if there's associated expenses which make it unprofitable, if you enjoy it or not (some people enjoy their main job!) etc and if you were to answer the question "no" then make a claim surrounding the use of the car during that second job, it would be discovered and treated as an attempt to fraudulently obtain a lower insurance quote. I believe what normally happens is the insurance company recalculate what the premium would have been, then work out the proportion you did pay, then pay out on the claim with that proportion (which wouldn't normally be so bad, if the difference was small). However they are also likely to put an entry onto the Claims and Underwriting Exchange (CUE) and Motor Insurance Anti-Fraud Theft Register (MIAFTR) databases. And they are able to then cancel your policy too - meaning you'd have to declare this on obtaining any subsequent insurance - which WILL bump up your insurance very significantly. And don't forget, anyone could/can claim on your policy and you may be powerless to prevent this, for example if you did have an accident and ended up in hospital, unable to manage the situation, but they had your reg.

When I held pet insurance for my dog, they didn't ask occupation - it was more about breed of dog, KC registration, pre-existing medical conditions, level of cover etc.

I don't think its a reading vs non-reading debate. Its more a "professional" vs "sloppy" mindset debate (I appreciate we are talking about amateur and semi-pro musicians here). I asked the question "How are you communicating with your fellow musicians, if not all reading sheet music?" because I KNOW guitarists generally don't read sheet music, but they must be either deciphering it by ear then memorising; or deciphering it then writing it down in their own personalised way, which might look like a chord chart (but might not). All of those steps are prone to error (as is reading, if you make mistakes such as not remembering the key sig; not counting beats properly etc) but I'd say they're less robust, therefore you need to up your game to do it properly. Clearly this guitarist isn't.

I actually agree with ZilchWoolham, in that for rock/pop, listening to the music is even more important than eg listening to a classical/jazz piece, in order to perform it well. Whilst the rock/pop might be simpler in terms of repeating riffs and a more rigid verse/chorus structure, that simplicity - and also the space created by having fewer instruments playing - opens up the possibilities for detail/subtle differences in timbre, expression, small variations in timing etc which goes to create "the song" as a whole. The classical/jazz musician is no better than the rock/pop musician, its just that their skillbase leans more towards being able to play from reading rather than commit to memory; and more tightly playing "as written", in general. Of course there are shades of grey in there too, every element is important. If you can't read music (of any kind - eg tab, leadsheet form, chord chart, etc) then that leaves listening then memorising as the way to accomplish the task in hand. I would say that's harder (to do consistently well). At the end of the day, reading is a "hump" you need to get over as a skill, but its fairly simple and intuitive, in that advancing time reads left to right; and higher notes are higher up on the staff. Also its not really fair to "pick on" guitarists as non-reading, really the reason is its a function of the type of music a guitar is typically featured or called upon in. The average guitarist simply doesn't need to read music because its not that relevant. But they need to develop some alternate way of being able to work alongside other musicians in a rehearsal situation and play the right thing at the right time as the others. Another myth to bust on "reading on guitar" is that its unnaturally hard - its not - violin, viola, cello, etc players do it all the time, yes there's different positions and different ways to play the same thing, but that's true of almost every other instrument too and just a part of playing that instrument.

The point is more that where a musical genre is more complicated, then relying on interpreting and playing by ear becomes troublesome in itself; and its by necessity the parts need to be more organised than simply allowing/expecting each musician to transcribe. Also, "complicated" could mean more instruments. A rock band has say 3-6 instruments, a big band has 18 parts. If there is a chord to be played, how does the 2nd alto sax player know which note to play, because someone needs to play the (for example) 9th, but is it the alto sax, tenor sax, trumpet, trombone etc? Not so easy to determine by ear. And an orchestra might have 30-40 different parts. Also don't forget that notated music also has much more than simply the notes and rhythm - there is dynamics, marks of expression, breath, accent etc too, all of which goes to make up the 'feel' of the music, accepting that its impossible to notate everything and there is still scope for interpretation or differences between it and the original recording. Also its about time saving (ie efficiency) too. If you have an amateur music group who rehearse once a week, not everyone has the time to sit and listen to a song and accurately transcribe it (and commit it to memory). There's different skills: reading music; sight reading (which is distinct in itself); expression, playing in time/tune, transcribing, playing by ear, improvising etc. You are what you practice too - if you are an average musician in an amateur music group, you are probably used to reading and sight reading but might not be so great at playing in time, or improvising. A well rounded musician doesn't have a weakness, or has a way to work around eg not reading music so that they're not holding up the rest of the band; or they can adapt to different situations, genres etc without too much issue.

Horrendous inefficiency aside.......that technique relies on each musician listening to the SAME recording. And also agreeing on what the "intro", "verse", "chorus", "break" etc is, otherwise if during rehearsal you stop, you'll have to go to the beginning to restart playing it. Yuk! Of course, pop/rock music is much simpler than those genres where written dominates, so its not really that much of an issue. Except when it is.

How are you communicating with your fellow musicians, if not all reading sheet music?

I would say: 1. Split coil pickup in the right place 2. Body style 3. Thick-ish neck and...... 4. Made by Fender or Squier. Anything else is either slightly less than, or with more pickups a little bit more than, or a variation of, a Precision.

I use Viddly, its always worked good for me.

Don't get Bude and (Isle of) Bute mixed up, if you're planning travel nationally in the UK.

Indeed they do - for the situations where its an individual who requires it. For example a solo act; or a music teacher, or when you're depping; or when you're in a group which isn't a "partnership" or some other legal being of its own.

That's not the legal definition of being a partnership though. It is: "two or more individuals ‘carrying on a business in common with a view of profit’." At this stage it is worth clarifying exactly the type of situation the band Chienmortbb (OP) is in, because I imagine many bands will have been set up WITHOUT a "view of profit" but they might end up in a situation where they're paid for small pub/club gigs. Clearly some bands could be viewed like that, so WOULD be legally interpreted as a partnership. But then its also possible that in setting a band up, its done as a Limited Liability Partnership. This wouldn't be incidental or presumed, the members would have subscribed their names to an incorporation document. When we took our band from a non-gigging bunch of people who just happened to meet up at the same time each week in a scout hut, to a properly registered entity which did (sometimes quite high) paying gigs, we went the route to establish a constitution, bank account, membership of Making Music etc and it was a somewhat counterintuitive, definite process we had to go through with a lot of admin. All band members were very aware at the time of what was going on. ETA In terms of insurance, I can't imagine any insurer offering PLI without some type of underlying admin or statement which is agreed to, which clarifies the legal status of the thing they're insuring, since its not a simple case of insuring an individual. IIRC Musicians Union don't do PLI for groups either.

Doesn't the electrician who did the PAT (test) also record the result for his own records, just in case a multi-million pound claim should come his way where something he/she tested subsequently fails and causes an injury or fire? I would imagine for a larger claim, the insurers would delve into this - partly as a cost efficiency measure to try minimise claim payouts. Anyway, AIUI a sticker is only half the stuff you get anyway - there is also a paper certificate and electronic record of the PAT test which you retain, for just such an occurrence as above. So it would be trivially easy for an insurance company to halt progress on an invalid claim like the above.

The "putting 48 volts of phantom power into the DI" sounds like a red herring/excuse/Balaerics, because the WHOLE POINT (and why its called "phantom" power) of phantom power is that it DOESN'T affect the signal or device its connected to, except that a small amount of power is available should it need it (eg active box, condenser mic). I suspect the actual issue was that he wanted a direct signal from the bass pre-effects or any tone controls or colouration/distortion from your amp, so that he himself could control those aspects of the bass sound. Are the effects including the amp/overdrive/distortion important to you and your/the band's sound? If so, then he should have been happy to accept a post-amp DI. If not, then by all means direct from bass DI is fine, and is actually better because if your amp loses power or blows up etc, it doesn't stop the show and the signal chain is simpler and more manageable. Of course there is always the option to give both, and he can blend the amp/direct as he chooses for FOH. ETA for completeness, the 3rd option is that he close-mics your amp/cabinet.

Japanese Fender Jazz (completely original/standard). Does it for me. (Never owned a Precision but I expect a lot of Precisions will come up on this thread).

Its quite common nowadays. Basically what has happened is councils and other venue owners have done several rounds of cost-cutting exercise and pared down their insurance to the barest minimum, so that where a few years ago they'd have just covered mundane things like this, now they put the responsibility for holding the PLI onto each act visiting/using the facilities. Think, WI, badminton club, etc for a village hall. Regarding PAT testing, it is not a strict legal requirement but any venue can impose any (reasonable) condition or refuse hire. So if they say it needs to be PAT tested, then that's the way it is. AFAIK in the first 12 months of a new piece of electrical equipment, it is assumed to already be 'tested' - so if you have/bring new electrical gear, you don't need to go through with the actual testing.

Put simply: The reason I relate it to the limiter function, is that everything in the signal chain, could be a limiter - some obviously you don't want to reach its peak then its limiting (like PA output speakers, for example) because it won't sound good. Some (like valve pre-amp) have a perceived pleasant sound when reaching the limiting stage. HOWEVER in the context of the original thread, discussing the JPDR Jive pedal, it will also "colour" the sound to replicate "tape saturation & distortion/fuzz".

"Phone camera video" sounds like the culprit here. Clearly either the phone video and/or the audio recording aren't playing back at the same rate they were recorded, hence the drift you can perceive from 1 min onwards. I dare say, with the fact that you recorded it in Reaper, unless you made some erroneous slip there, its replaying at the same speed as the original recording. You'll need to use some kind of video editor to "tweak" the phone camera video's tempo to match the audio track. I am guessing you didn't do a clap at the end too; but there may be a useful reference you can refer to in some trial and error process.

If you're coming in on the 2nd beat, then you're half a beat too late: