molan

I've always thought that some older Peavey gear sounded good, especially the Black Widow equipped cabs. My issue with them is simply that they generally weigh so much

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1384074267' post='2272383'] My AV didn't like that link Barrie..?? [/quote] That's odd, works fine on iPhone, iPad and iMac for me. Just search for The Sway Orchestra. One of the leading function bands around, they've played all over the world at some very high profile corporate events.

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1384029499' post='2272175'] Who was the band on here that did the awesome promo video with the blue tuxedos etc? They were great, and they travel if I remember rightly. Only issue might be that the truly outstanding bands are probably booked at this point Wedding season is mad like that. [/quote] That'll be EBS Freak above

Bit boring but budget will make a big difference. I know some seriously good players but they are pretty expensive. This is who I booked for my daughter's wedding next year http://www.swaytheband.com/

I work now and then in a bass specialist retailer - we have a full length mirror and a white board that can be used as a photographic backdrop. There is a good reason for this. . .

Dr Duck's Ax Wax is your friend - use it on just about any part of the bass

Best thing I've ever heard from NiN - by a huge distance as well Actually made me download the album! usually my hand is wandering towards the 'skip' or channel change' buttons whenever NiN come on. Just goes to show you can't please all of the people. . .

[quote name='frontman' timestamp='1383920112' post='2270828'] Thanks very much for the offer of help with the ad! We are actually getting a load of enquiries at the moment so I think we may be ok for a little while with the online efforts but if these don't produce anything I would love to come back to you? Noted re the website. I am actually building a new responsive site at the moment to be ready for 2014 which will address the issues you mentioned and more [/quote] Any time - just let me know Site load times were very slow as well - that's worth looking at. Could be large image sizes. Hope you find someone soon

[quote name='Musicman20' timestamp='1383911792' post='2270676'] At £1300-1600 for a tube amp, I would go straight to Matamp or Orange. [/quote] And that's the killer for me too!

Yep, I also got a confirmation that RRP is going to be £1,900 so I'd expect a potential 'street' price to be somewhere around the £1,800 mark. May be able to set up an in-store demo day when they finally ship. It doesn't look like there's a power switching option (although this may be adjustable inside the head) so it's going to need a step-down transformer if anyone fancies bringing in a US import. I have one of these for my B15 and they aren't huge money and seem to work fine but it's a bit of a pain to lug around on a small head I have a feeling any grey imports won't be covered by a UK warranty and playing with power circuits may well invalidate the warranty anyway. I can't really understand the price differential on these from US to UK. Maybe it's just an early blip and they'll drop at some point if demand is really poor. Not sure how much the more powerful Strategy is going to be but I'd estimate something like £2,300.

Looking forward to seeing how this turns out Pierre

I help out at a bass specific music shop that's in your catchment area. If you have a bassist wanted posted I can get it displayed in the showroom for you Also, just a friendly bit of advice - your front page image says you're now taking bookings for 2012 and 2013, probably needs a quick update. Also the, all important, media page music demos don't appear to load on a mobile device like iPad or iPhone - site may need re-formatting for mobile given the increasing usage of these to access music sites. Looks like it's in Wordpress and there's quite a few easy to use free plug-ins around to allow music to play in pretty much any browser

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1383824970' post='2269552'] I guess if you work in advertising its easy to assume that everyone is lying about everything all the time [/quote] Absolutely! Although I could say that if you work in scientific research then for every report published that proves something then another will prove the exact opposite

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1383823081' post='2269511'] I still don't understand why you think the "newsworthy"-ness of a piece of research is even remotely relevant. If the science was performed [i]properly[/i]---which this was---then whether or not journalists decide to write about it is by the by. Being newsworthy does not mean that the research is "cheap scientific hokum". You don't get into PNAS with puff pieces, you get in with good research. Did you really dismiss a piece of peer reviewed research in a distinguished journal as "cheap hokum" on the say-so of some dudes on internet guitar forums? Thats quite impressive. As for the pharma stuff---contrary to the belief of most laymen, science isn't exact. Its perfectly possible for two studies to be performed perfectly and come to different conclusions. The universe is strange like that. Thats why it takes lots of studies by lots of people before something will get accepted as "fact". Yes, big companies quite often want to do particular research in order to validate some product, but so long as they do their research honestly and submit it for full peer review there's nothing wrong with that. Self-published pieces should always be treated with suspicion, but peer reviewed research in respected journals has to be taken at face value. [/quote] Because, in my professional sphere, I have repeatedly seen research carried out in order to generate news. Simple as that really.

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1383822678' post='2269496'] I spent that period at Lonsdales, and at French Gold Abbott. [/quote] I knew people at both! I was at JWT in Berkley Square

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1383821874' post='2269474'] Strewth! That was slave labour rates at the time ... were you a school-leaver or something? [/quote] University drop-out, lol. I was studying law at UCL but moved into in a flat with Billy Idol (he moved next door as I arrived but was a regular visitor), a stripper / nude model and a fairly high level illicit substance dealer. Surrounded by that lot it seemed that Uni life was a bit dull so i got a job in an ad agency - the link came from someone in their HR team who lived opposite and wondered who all the 'strange' people were that came in and out of our place at all hours. She said she thought I was perfectly suited to work in advertising. . . Money was ludicrous, I lived on soya mince and doggy bags that my work friends bought back from lunch for me. Got a £1,000 pay rise after 6 months though - seemed a lot at the time

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1383817440' post='2269389'] I don't see what the point you are trying to make is. The fact that journalists decided to print a story based on a study is completely irrelevant to the valid scientific findings of that study. Journalists running pieces about research doesn't somehow invalidate that research. There were lots of newspaper articles about the discovery of the Higgs Boson recently, I suppose thats just "cheap scientific hokum" too? [/quote] I had read in quite a few places that this report was only news because the findings went against what was generally believed and I just took their word for it. Maybe I'm just jaundiced from working with too many huge businesses (particularly the global pharma brands) that conduct, incredibly well researched, scientific studies in order to gain publicity or add credence to a product claim. I've seen 10 year studies conducted to prove that one product has a particular benefit in order to validate it. Then another massive global concern publishes a report from a seemingly just as authoritative source saying something different. i guess my point was that a lot of research appears to be conducted with a view to publishing something new and, ideally, newsworthy in order to demonstrate the credentials of the researchers. If all a study does is to expand something people already know then it isn't news, it doesn't generate any sort of significant media coverage and the report disappears without trace. An example might be 'scientists prove water is wet' - no-one is going to publish this because it isn't newsworthy or interesting. Well, I guess maybe the Daily Mail might be able to put some spin on it by adding that English water is wetter, and therefore more desirable so the entire population of Bulgaria are planning to migrate to England, live on benefits and breed openly gay children in order to take advantage

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1383817120' post='2269385'] Returning to historic inflation briefly, I bought a new P bass in 1976 for £280 - or £1,710 in today's money. Question is, where the hell did my 16-year-old self get that kind of cash from?? Oh, I remember now - I had already left home and was in full-time employment. Bit of social commentary, there. [/quote] That was me too Only it was 1979 and it was only £110 for a Fender Musicmaster. My annual salary at the time was £2,500 - even in those days that wasn't really enough to live on but at least I was working and really enjoyed my job

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1383814731' post='2269352'] Sorry, but I can't let this pass. Its not a "story", its a piece of properly performed peer-reviewed science performed by a group of serious, honest scientists. It was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, one of the worlds most prestigious scientific journals. Describing it as "scientific hokum" is so wide of the mark that it isn't even funny. I have a PhD in musical acoustics and had several long discussions with Claudia Fritz (the author of the study) several times during the course of my work. She's a very good scientist and her work is completely and utterly above board and without bias.If you think that the Dr Fritz wouldn't have published the results had they been the other way round then you are completely and utterly mistaken. That instrumentalists could blindly select old instruments would in itself be an important finding. Feel free to read more about it here: [url="http://www.lam.jussieu.fr/Membres/Fritz/HomePage/Indianapolis.html"]http://www.lam.jussieu.fr/Membres/Fritz/HomePage/Indianapolis.html[/url] [/quote] I can see where you are coming from but I can't believe this story would have been published anywhere other than scientific journals if it had found that people could tell the difference. It simply wouldn't have been 'news'. I'm certainly not qualified to judge the validity of any piece of scientific research but, having spent nearly 35 years in marketing I am able to have a decent view on PR and journalism.

[quote name='LukeFRC' timestamp='1383782195' post='2269197'] Molan - I am interested - how do you find your modern vintage styled wes steed compare to your real '63 Jazz? how would you describe them tonally? [/quote] Interesting - the honest answer is that they are worlds apart but I genuinely can't say how much of that is down to age. The '63 is far more versatile and will do good old classic '60's thump but also has an amazing slap tone (a very, very good pro player who's famed for his slap sound actually thought it sounded better than his all time favourite vintage Fender when being slapped!). The Steed is far more of an old school sound and it carried this off very well - especially when strung with flat wounds. I've never really tried it with a super modern set of rounds so it's possible it has more versatility than I think Visually a lot of people can't really tell them apart in terms of age but the newer bass actually looks more 'distressed' than the older one and many people think it's the more vintage of the two. The neck is a bit of a giveaway though - the '63 has a neck to die for and it's beautifully worn in to a silky smooth feel. The Steed is immediately a much newer feel, it's still very nice but you can tell it hasn't had 50 years of playing. The board on both is Brazilian rosewood but, again, the '63 feels, and looks, a lot older up close.

[quote name='Beedster' timestamp='1383776221' post='2269113'] Mmm, my '64 sounded about as good as it gets though a B-15 of similar vintage. . It does however mean that folk like me five years back who think they'll find something magical in a 50 year old bass will be either deluded or disillusioned when they buy one. [/quote] I think this is where owning a 'vintage' bass becomes really interesting. For people looking for a certain sound or vibe then owning an original '64P and a similar era B15 represents the absolute pinnacle of tonal nirvana. Whether most people can hear any difference between these and modern equivalents is a, very, moot point. However, for many people, there is so much more to the enjoyment of playing than the simple sound that others can hear. For these people there's some sort of mystique to flipping the power switches on a B15, waiting for it to warm up and smiling as the Ampeg logo comes to life with a warm glow and then going to full power whilst caressing a silky smooth worn in neck from 50 years of gigging and with perfect fretting and a gorgeous feel. For a lot of people that genuinely is the definition of 'magical' This experience is pretty damn tough to replicate with modern kit and I'm absolutely sure that's why lots of people think nothing of dropping thousands on vintage gear. It makes them feel great and inspires them to play in a way that modern equipment never will. I'm not judging these people or saying that they are crazy to spend this sort of money on a couple of planks of wood, a few bits of rusty metal and some out of date electronics plus an amplification system that has its roots in a bygone era but I can completely understand their passion. If, simply by owning these ancient artefacts, they play longer and derive greater pleasure playing then that's only a good thing as far as I'm concerned. The difficult part is justifying cost. If you could remove cost from the equation would you have kept the '64 and B15 because of the amount of pleasure you got for them. If the replacements are not definitively 'better', however you might define that, then maybe the older models might have been more fun to play. The thing I always, without fail, find odd about discussions over expensive objects is that people so often deride others just because they've lashed out on something that may not have an intrinsically greater value than a far cheaper item. If it makes them happier then where's the harm?

[quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1383774318' post='2269076'] I'm familiar with Wolk but I didn't know he was dead. [/quote] Over three years now, very sad Tribute gig here: http://www.livefromdarylshouse.com/currentep.html?ep_id=15

[quote name='Musicman20' timestamp='1383744177' post='2268410'] They should just sell direct to the shops and cut out one more level of profit. [/quote] In many cases the reduction in profit means a massive reduction in service levels and serious availability (and delivery issues). Many retailers will pull out of a brand completely because they now have to order large stocks in order to save costs on bulk shipping. This then whacks up their cost of retained stock and few people can afford that in this climate. They alternative is to order in small numbers and this throws shipping prices through the roof. Plus the manufacturer now has to deal with loads of individual shop calls and requirements plus warranty conversations. This increases the manufacturer overhead substantially and, hey presto, the price gets put back onto the products to cover the extra costs. Net result can often be significantly worse service and lack of product and prices end up near to where they were originally