Dingus

[quote name='Musicman20' timestamp='1389111103' post='2330136'] I've never quite understood this 'Stingrays are scooped'. I'd say a Jazz bass with both pups on is very scooped, whereas a Ray has peaks and scoops in the mids, but the mid frequences affected are different. Eg, most the Ray tones I like are very low mid aggressive, but of course you can roll up the bass and treble and make it scooped and modern which a lot of the slap bassists prefer. A Stingray tends to kick like a mule...a very immediate feel to the pickup response, which is partly due to that low mid/high bass kick, and there must also be a peak in the high mids for the detail. I think P basses, whilst ALWAYS popular, are VERY much in fashion at the moment. I remember back in the mid 90s when people thought I was weird buying a MIJ Precision. This was also when Orange were big with Oasis using their amps, way before they revved up and became super popular like they are now. Times change a lot. Thing is, boutique manufacturers are bound to make P bass copies, because they are selling! The Super Jazz is still a big seller, but the P is everywhere now. To be honest, I think charging £2.5k for a P bass which isn't a vintage Fender is crazy. It is a VERY simple design. To me, the P is great, but I'd choose a Fender American Standard everytime over a boutique P copy. People don't copy the Ray so much because they can't. Aguilar however are now starting to make a MM style pickup. [/quote] I agree with you entirely that the Stingray has scoops [i]and[/i] peaks in its' midrange, and it is exactly that that makes those basses sound so individualistic. To my ears at least, though, I would put things the other way round and say the scoop was in the low mids and the peak in the upper mids, but that impression is certainly open to conjecture because that bass has got such a weird and spread-out frequency response that it can be very hard to accurately quantify and describe. Whatever the technical reason , most people would agree that a Stingray can certainly be made to cut through most mixes if you EQ it appropriately, albeit with a different kind of presence than you get with a Precision Bass , or a Jazz for that matter. The scooped tone of a Jazz Bass with both pickups is often more audible in a mix than you might think when hearing it soloed, again depending on how you EQ it. The Jazz Bass has such an inherently complex midrange that it has more than one way to make itself heard in an ensemble situation , and that is one of the many beauties of that design. Ultimately, we are comparing chalk and cheese, and it's a good thing that Fender basses and Musicman basses do sound so different, what with variety being the spice of life, and all that. If a Stingray had a more honky midrange then it would just be a Precision Bass with a primitive preamp and the pickup an inch further towards the bridge, and what would be the point in that? Some great players - Tony Levin is the best example I can think of , but there many others- have taken that unique Stingray tone and exploited its' sonic potential to great effect. If they had just tried to make it sound generic or like a Fender then a lot would have been lost in the process .

[quote name='BetaFunk' timestamp='1389004587' post='2328549'] People who really haven't grown up and real eccentrics don't know it. There is nothing 'not grown up' in being in a band. it's a very normal thing to do. You all seem to me very well adjusted individuals. Not crazy and certainly grown up. It's simply what we do. [/quote] There is certainly nothing juvenile about playing music for a living. It's a very hard way to make ends meet for most people , unless they are very good and /or very lucky. In my experience, people who are not musicians think that playing music is a sign of retarded adolescence, but in fact if you try to play music for living you have to face the harsh realities of life like how to pay the bills, keep a roof over you head and feed yourself sooner than if you had a "normal" job.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1389002631' post='2328516'] I don't think I've "grown up" enough for what I do to be considered a "Mid-life Crisis". Also from my personal experience age is becoming less important than ever, especially since the "traditional" concept of "making it" is all but dead. When the audiences have the same spread of ages as the bands is that really surprising? Besides those with grown up kids, paid off mortgages etc. are the ones with the real disposable income which allows them to buy records/CDs and other merchandise. [/quote] I don't think the traditional concept of "making it " is dead at all. In fact , I think what has happened is that the music industry has reverted to an older model , where the record companies have more power and demand more control and their backing is more crucial than ever if you want meaningful commercial success. You are absolutely right about the changing demographic of the wider audience for rock music , but, crucially, do you think that audience is spending money on new music made by older people? I don't see much evidence to suggest that they are.

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1389022130' post='2328880'] I have a Marcus J and used to own a Geddy J. What makes the Geddy for me (and many others who own them) is the neck. You won't find that same neck spec on any other Fender J. It was apparently shaved down to his personal taste and the sig instruments replicate this. Although I am a big Geddy fan, that is not why I got one of his sig basses. I did a lot of research and playing basses, and the Geddy ticked all the boxes for me. Not sure the Badass II makes much of a difference mind... As Geddy Lee's original is a '72 bass, the bridge pickup is in the correct position on the sig model (about 1/4" nearer the bridge than the "standard" or 60s positioning). The defining feature of the Marcus sig is the scratchplate and what is under it. Sadly, this seems to be where Fender shot themselves in the foot as the stock pickups and preamp do not have a good reputation. Mine now has Wizard Hammers and a John East Marcus Retro preamp and it sounds great, adding to a bass that (although heavy - like many Fender Js of circa 1977) plays very nicely. Not sure what they were thinking of when they put reverse tuners on though (unless Marcus' own bass has them on, which I doubt!). They are not period-correct (and are bloody irritating when you are used to the standard ones!). Other than the electronics and tuners, it is pretty much a standard late seventies J with MOP blocks and white binding. Nice! I like both of these sig basses because they are excellent examples of Jazz basses. The names on the headstock are irrelevant to me, in fact I would happily remove them! People who label these basses and their owners as fanboys are missing the point and denying themselves to opportunity of playing some great basses. [/quote] I was a pre-teen Geddy Lee obsessive ( that would make a good title for my autobiography, on reflection ) and I would still be more disposed towards [i]any[/i] bass if Geddy favours it, but I couldn't get on with his Fender signature model , despite wanting to . They are perfectly good basses in their own right, but the neck was just a bit too skinny for my tastes, all of which goes to reinforce what you are saying about Artist models not necessarily blinkering peoples judgement either way , whether or not they are a fan of the player in question. Apparently the neck on that signature model is even skinnier than the neck on the original bass, which must be true because I have played a lot of Jazz Basses from that era and none had necks remotely like that version on the Geddy Lee. It's a great thing, however, that Fender do make such a bass with a skinny neck for players that want that kind of a profile for whatever reason, and conversely there are other Jazz Basses in the Fender catalogue that have unusually fat necks , as well as plenty of profiles in between , so there should be something to suit every taste .

I think Fender signature models make a lot of sense. One of the ( many) beauties of the Fender bass is that it lends itself to all kinds of variations and customisations. Small details can make a big difference to the individual player. An American Standard Jazz with a maple board sounds and feels very different to a Geddy Lee model , for example, even though on the face of it they are both essentially just passive Jazz Basses made of identical woods with very similar pickup configurations.

I think a lot of Fender CS basses are great instruments and I would love one myself, but competition in that area of the market is pretty fierce - who doesn't make a Fender-style bass nowadays? - and I see equally enticing basses of similar styles from a whole host of manufacturers. I have played most if not all of the main contenders in the uber-Fender arena (and owned a fair few over the years) , and I think that , overall, if you don't want a fancy onboard preamp , the best are Fender CS and USA- made Lakland , and I couldn't really say one was better than the other . Lakland are a bit easier to deal with as a company than the bureaucracy of the Fender Custom Shop dealer network , but Fender CS have upped their game as a direct result of such competition by introducing quartersawn necks as standard nowadays ect , and they can make you an authentic Fender to your dream spec if you are specific enough in your mandate to them ( and have the necessary cash). If I wwere you, I would decide what I really wanted from the Custom Shop and then contact a dealer to get a rough idea of the cash price, and then you would at least know what you are dealing with as a proposition.

[quote name='geoffbyrne' timestamp='1388954400' post='2328145'] I have a PA I can't even pick up..... G. [/quote] I had a similar problem with my Personal Assistant , but she eventually succumbed to my charms.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1388944602' post='2327933'] What does the panel think that "commercially successful" actually means? There must be thousands of musicians who manage to earn a living from playing in bands but my feeling is that 'commercially successful' would be a step beyond that, though I'm not sure what exactly it would be. [/quote] When most young people set with serious ambitions t to play music what they ultimately aspire to is to be in band with a recording contract that makes albums and does international tours. I know I certainly did. That is the usual benchmark.

[quote name='redstriper' timestamp='1388937783' post='2327819'] Robbie favours a Jazz these days, like Fams - sometimes a stack knob. This is an older gig, worth a look if you haven't seen it: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U4nm0Vvcz8&feature=share&list=PL4CF8C1F37C208FFC&index=20[/media] [/quote] Robbie was originally a Jazz Bass player. He was playing one when I saw him with Black Uhuru in the early '80's , so it seems that he must have reverted to his old favourite.

I know from past experience that these threads about age can be very sensitive , to say the least, so I will try to tread carefully. There is nothing wrong with playing rock music - or indeed any kind of music- if you are of advancing years, but if anyone thinks that they are going to become commercially successful playing original material over the age of forty if they not already a musician with an established career then they are kidding themselves. It just doesn't happen . That is one aspect to consider. Rock music is a middle-aged art form anyway- it goes hand- in- hand with watching Top Gear and wearing jeans like Jeremy Clarkson- so I wouldn't waste a minute of time worrying about whether you are too old to play that style of music, but when older folks have delusions that they could still be "cutting edge" and in-tune with what young people really like nowadays then things can get a bit awkward. Age is just a number, as people seem to like to say , but it's a number that lets people know how old you are, and, crucially, it doesn't really matter how older people see themselves in relation to younger people, the important thing is how the young see older people. And middle -aged people are just as irrelevant to the lives of young people now as they were when we were young.

Always love to hear what these guys are up to . Thanks for posting this.

[quote name='spacey' timestamp='1388928862' post='2327678'] They did not as they were not invented, but comparing them to other instruments of the time, they were comparable. It's more about the brand, where next Fender from Koesung North Korea ? There is always a market for the best, come on Fender ! [/quote] If they had been making Fender in North Korea we would already be having heated discussion on whether the Kim Jong -un era basses are as good as the ones produced under the leadership of Kim Jong-il. ( I think the Kim Jong -un ones would probably actually be better because they might have the new lightweight tuners on them).

On the theme of "Signature basses that don't exist that should do" , , what about signature basses that [i]do[/i] exist that shouldn't? I would nominate the 34 inch scale Alembic Stanley Clarke. That contraption takes neck- dive and overall playing discomfort to a new level . I tried one once and it was horrendous, despite sounding like an Alembic .

[quote name='Immo' timestamp='1388763867' post='2325784'] Klaus Flouride's legendary JB. Package should include strap, DK car sticker and a small jar of blood to stain the pickguard. [/quote] This is what students at Manchester Polytechnic used to look like in the late 1970's.

I remember going to see Simple Minds play live at the time that Glittering Prize was current and Derek Forbes was indeed using a P Bass with a pick and it sounded great . To recreate the sound on that record though, what you really need is not just a Precision Bass but also one of the crappy bass amps that were commonly available at the time, like a big Carsboro combo of some description . Such amps had "Bright " inputs or buttons that gave a boost to the scratchy upper frequencies in a manner that made every note you played seem like an endurance test, and if you "popped " a note in a funky fashion( as was very popular at the time) the resulting "clang" would deafen everyone within earshot. Most people would shy away from such a tone , but Derek, to his great credit, exploited it to the maximum on that record and it ended up sounding superb .

Another Rutger fan here. Everyone of a certain age grew up listening to ABBA, and everybody liked them , even if they wouldn't have admitted it at the time. The 1970's in Britain would have been completely different without ABBA and the simple joy they brought to our lives . We would probably have become a grim and dour Socialist state on the verge of bankruptcy , or something along those lines . Oh hang on a minute, we[i] were[/i] a grim and dour Socialist state on the verge of bankruptcy , I forgot! Anyway, , the basslines on those ABBA records were perfection , as was just about everything else about them.

This problem is far more likely to do with your pickups than anything to do with the preamp, and any inherent unevenness in the response of the bass is far more likely to be related to the actual resonance and physical structure of the bass than the electronics. I would very surprised if fitting any new preamp will remedy this perceived problem, and would most likely just turn out to be a waste of money. It's conceivable that using some compression might help even things out a bit , but I would also experiment with the relative height and angling of the pickups and see if that can make a positive difference. See if putting them very slightly closer than Warwick recommend helps at all, maybe. Thumbs are a particularly powerful sounding bass, it always seemed to me, and the notes tend to "pop" out with a lot of clarity , so what you are describing is not what I would expect from that bass, although I must confess that have never owned one myself and am not that intimately acquainted with the ins-and-outs of them. Could you try another Thumb to compare it to and see if it is the problem is inherent to that design or whether yours is , unfortunately, compromised in some way?

[quote name='ambient' timestamp='1388798158' post='2326317'] Hence the thread title . I hate cabbage, so I don't eat it. I don't feel the need to eat a large plateful and then pronounce to everyone assembled around me how much I disliked it . This is a nice bit of film, it shows close up some of his right hand techniques. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHyHxply7Js&feature=related[/media] [/quote] [i]That[/i] is the real AJ.

Well, I like bass solos as much as the next man if they are good ones, and I think Anthony's playing on this clip is O.K, if not his best effort, but he just doesn't have enough time to develop his ideas. Overall though , this was dire. I am a huge fan of Anthony Jackson , and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in so much as this was an error of judgement in his taking part in a bass solo "competition "- that in itself sounds to me like the antithesis of everything that AJ stands for as an artist- but any serious musician sharing a stage with Victor Wooten and Steve Bailey is likely to be tainted by the depressing pointlessness of all their musical efforts. Individually they are irritating and tedious , but put them together as a double act and their overall contribution is even worse. They are dreadful. I've got one of their" Bass Extremes" albums somewhere that my brother bought me as a present once . The bastard.

Those classic Everly Brothers records still sound great today, but back when they came out they must have sounded amazing. No wonder then that the Everly Brothers have become one of the most influential acts in the history of rock and roll, considering the effect they had on the generations of musicians that came after them. Lennon and McCartney were huge fans,for instance, as were countless other musicians, songwriters and producers.

[quote name='alhbass' timestamp='1388665809' post='2324477'] I've owned a number of instruments over the years (though not that many when compared to some BCer's!), and currently have a Yamaha BB1024x as my main instrument. I love it, but naturally it has it's limitations tonally, so I recently purchased a Peavey T40 in the hope that it would offer me some different sounds... I was particularly attracted by it's apparent tonal versatility and capacity to mimic various classic bass sounds (Rick, Musicman, T Bird etc - see YouTube for many and various demonstrations..), especially the humbucking ones that my Yamaha doesn't do (of course). It does seem to be able to make quite a variety of sounds, but I must say I've yet to fall in love with any of them... Maybe I just need to experiment more, and I might change the strings too (currently has La Bella flats on it). Anyway, it got me thinking about what other single bass I might consider trading my current ones in for... I'd welcome suggestions. I'd be looking for something that would offer great P bass and PJ sounds (like my passive Yamaha), but perhaps something with the option of active circuitry too, so I could get some more "modern", full, fat tones that would work with soul/pop music as well as rock and vintage/funky tones. My musical tastes and interests are quite varied - I currently play in a kind of urban soul/dub-influenced pop band, but also love vintage funk and disco, and have been in many much heavier rock and blues bands so my influences range pretty much across the spectrum from Lemmy to Nate Watts! I know there always have to be compromises along the line, and that (probably) no single instrument can do everything - but I suspect there must be some basses out there that would do a better job than my current set up. If I sold both of mine I'd have something in the region of £1000 to spend, so that's my upper limit really. Might possibly stretch a little further if a very attractive option turned up though... Suggestions would be very welcome. Happy New Year one and all! [/quote] Without wishing to sound provocative, and hopefully maybe ultimately saving you some money in the process, I would venture that the problem isn't so much your bass(es) but the way you you are using them, or at least the way you are [i]thinking[/i] about them. Firstly, no one bass that I can think of will necessarily give you what you describe yourself hankering for- maybe a Lakland 44-02 comes close in certain respects in so much as it will give a mixture of Fender and Music Man -inspired tones , albeit with a more modern twist- but at the same time, you already have a bass in the Yamaha that should cover all the styles of music you describe. That bass is incredibly versatile in its' overall simplicity, and can handle various genres with aplomb due to the fact that it has such a powerful and well- judged basic sound. I really think the problem is one of your own perception rather than[i] needing[/i] to buy new equipment to get the sounds you are after ( although it is always fun and interesting to try new basses, of course) . It sounds to me like you are slightly overestimating how chameleon-like you need to be. A really good fundamental bass sound can be applied pretty much across any musical boundaries. I really don't know too much about the Peavey T40 except that they tend to be very heavy, and twenty years ago shops couldn't give them away. I am however, well-acquainted with the Yamaha BB2024X and if your 1024 is as close to that in terms of sound as they are reputed to be then if you use it appropriately then it is a tone monster in its' own right. It doesn't need a huge variety of sounds in terms of pickup settings and electronic gizmos because the ones that it has are so right that they are easily applicable to just about any music. G&L basses sound great in their own right, so I wouldn't discourage you from investigating one, but by the same token a good passive Jazz Bass is incredibly versatile if you know how to use it and will give you a lot of sounds inaccessible on you Yamaha or Peavey. You could also think about buying an external preamp that you could use on any of your present or future passive basses to give some extra tonal colour. If you can locate an old Yamaha NE1 Nathan East Signature preamp secondhand they tend to be fairly inexpensive but sound fantastic and will work great with your bass to help you shape the sound a bit more if that's what you think you need.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1388691855' post='2324971'] TBH I can't really see the point of the majority of Fender signature basses, unless the originals have been heavily modified to suit their owners requirements in which case I would image the market would be fairly limited, especially in the current conservative climate regarding musical instruments. [/quote] The point of them is to fire up the imagination of the bass - buying public and encourage them to keep buying Fender basses by using the power of association.

[quote name='Freddy Le Cragg' timestamp='1388690001' post='2324929'] Sorry if this has been done but what "famous" bass guitars would you dig if you could get a company to release a replica? I think mine would be this fella Leo Lyons 1962 Jazz Bass. Sublime [/quote] Wow, Leo Lyons! I was recently watching a documentary with him in it from 1970 called "Groupie", and wondering what happened to the girls featured in it. They must be in their sixties now, if they are still alive . Didn't the Bass Centre come out with a Leo Lyons Signature model quite recently?