Dingus

[quote name='Bmo7476' timestamp='1373081992' post='2133567'] Familiar face. I am looking forward to this bass. Not trying to build myself up. [/quote] Are you still waiting to have it delivered ? If it puts the price into some kind of context for you , in the U.K you could easily pay the same price for a run -of-the-mill mid 1970's Fender Precision Bass . The Wal in question is a far rarer and far higher quality bass than the similaly - priced vintage Fenders , so in that sense , it's a good price and an astute purchase . These basses have got an particulaly awesome sound for rock music , with a thunderous low end and plenty of midrange growl , a bit less hi-tech and hifi - sounding than a Wal Custom . Play one of these through a big amp at high volume and it will shake the room . One benefit of buying from a reputable dealer like Andy Baxter is that the bass has been checked over by his technician ( I think he uses Chris Ward who was the repairman at the Bass Centre in London for many years and who has an excellent reputation ) and Andy is vouching for the condition of the bass in his advert , so you should be hopeful that the bass will live up to your expectations .

[quote name='Bmo7476' timestamp='1373079479' post='2133564'] Dingus, who is the lady in your avatar? [/quote] She's a BBC newsreader / journalist called Jane Hill .

I remember these basses when they were current , and they were cracking basses . They may have been a more affordable , straightforward alternative to the Custom Bass when Wal basses were the height of fashion and in strong demand , but these Pro basses had a forthright and powerful sound of their own . They offered them with the pickup in this P Bass - like position , and some others had the pickup closer to the bridge . If that is the old brown Wal case as opposed to the later blue one then that would suggest very late 70's or early 1980's vintage to me , providing of course this is the case originally supplied with the bass . The electronics on the late 70's Pro Basses like this were slightly different , if I remember correctly - they had some little square shaped switches under the pickup mounts that gave a different emphasis to the overall sound and were very effective . The fact that this bass has a single series /parallel switch dates it later , if my recollection is correct . As for the price you paid , Wal Basses are selling at high prices nowadays due to limited supply and increased demand . As we have discussed on this site before many times , fifteen years ago you could pick up a Wal Custom in the U.K for £500- 650 , no problem . Since Justin Chancellor adopted these basses demand from the States has soared , along with a greatly reduced production of Wal basses so the prices have gone stratospheric . You will usually expect to pay more from a dealer than a private sale , and that is true of all basses , not just Wals . Anyhow , I hope you like the bass enough to feel whatever final price you paid was worthwhile .

[quote name='tedmanzie' timestamp='1372966597' post='2132307'] Elvis 9th on the bill! [/quote] He'll need time for his dinner !

Can I be 21 again and hitch hike down there ? Can I get picked up by some Dutch girls in a Volkwagen camper van ? If so , I'm not so bothered about what bands are on .

[quote name='xilddx' timestamp='1372944486' post='2131932'] Let's get this bit out the way first, ok? Digital modeling - Boss GT10B, POD XT/X3, and active DI's like SansAmp, Hartke VXL, etc, if used properly, can and do sound indistinguishable from an amp and cab rig in your FoH sound. You need to take this for granted if you don't believe me. I'll go one further and say the same is true for studio recordings but that's another story. The only advantage of using and amp and cab that I can work out from what people say on here is that it can make you trousers flap on stage, which to me is not a sensible reason at all. Most monitors are capable of pumping out some good bass for your reference. Quality digi modeling/effects units and active DIs offer (over amp and cab rigs) huge versatility and portability, consistent sound quality with most stage and room characteristics, reliability, simplicity of deployment, massive cost savings, less prone to damage, don't need to keep changing them in your quest for TONE, geezers in other bands never ask to borrow them for their set, you can't stand a pint on them .. Need I go on? It's beyond me why anyone would have the pain and worry of cab placement problems in auditoriums, needing gramma pads, transport issues, bad backs, lending them to other bands, very little versatility, easily damaged, buying and selling to find YOUR TONE, upsizing, downsizing, two rigs for different size gigs, getting them up and down narrow stairs ... So why do you REALLY insist on having amps and cabs? Fear of digital sound being unpredictable or sounding crap? Need a big old rig behind you to feel safe? Ignorance of going direct? Need a massive bass sound on stage? Can't be bothered to f*** about learning how to programme patches? Nostalgia? Inertia? ... I'm genuinely interested to know. [/quote] Well , for a start I do not accept for one moment your assertion that the digital modelling equipment you mention is a direct replacement for real amps and cabs in terms of front of house sound , except in so much as , for various reasons that I'm sure we are all only all too familiar with , front of house sound is so variable and unpredictable that any equpiment can end up sounding crap . I am fairly familiar with the POD and the Sansamp and I don't like either for differing reasons . In the case of the Sansamp I find it to have a very identifiable signature sound that is not to my taste , and I can pick it out on certain recordings to the extent that it has become a kind of bass - sound - by - numbers . The POD is OK and very convenient and I have used one for recording in the past but the problem I find with all digital modelling devices for bass that I have tried is that they definitely sound a bit " plinky " in the high frequencies . They also don't sound as transparent in terms of dynamics as a good amp and can setup to my tastes . Don't get me wrong , I do use digital modelling and find it very convenient and useful for recording , and a lot of fun too , and I'm sure that it will get better and better in years to come , but in absolute terms it can't match a conventional amp and cabs yet , and not by a long way . That said , if it works for you then why worry ? I regulaly hear bass players with fantastic conventional analogue amplification who sound practically inaudible , and if you are getting a good clear sound with digital then that is all you need . There are , after all , more than one way of skinning a cat , as the saying goes .

[quote name='GuyR' timestamp='1372925275' post='2131593'] Fender necks do vary within the same age range - if you look at some of the books about vintage Fender guitars which have tables of neck dimensions the dimensions for individual models do vary significantly . I expect it is the same for basses - although I am certainly no expert, I hasten to add. I have '62 and '65 jazz basses. The '62 has a shallower neck, although the widths feel the same. I wouldn't look for an early Jazz bass solely to find a slimmer neck, as there are great alternatives, but if you buy a good one you won't regret it. [/quote] On Guy's point about exploring alternatives , if you have got your heart set on a vintage Fender then fair enough , but there are indeed some excellent alternatives out there that capture the sound and vibe of a pre-CBS Fender without any of the drawbacks that a 40 - 50 year old bass is likely to have . I'm a Fender man myself and have played ( and owned ) a good deal of what is out there , and the best I have ever played for capturing the essence of old Fenders are the U.S.A - made Lakland basses . They may not look exactly like the old Fenders by virtue of their oval - shaped bridge , but the overall sound and feel of them is right on the money in capturing what those basses were about . The Joe Osborn model ( now called the 44-60 ) has a neck which is an exact replica of the neck on Joe's 1960 Jazz Bass that he played on hundreds of hits , or alternatively the U.S.A Darryl Jones model has a neck which is carved to exactly replicate the neck on Darryl's 1966 Fender Jazz . The other obvious option would be to get the Fender Custom Shop to make you something with a neck on the slimmer side , which I'm sure they would be happy to do .

[quote name='Undertone' timestamp='1372891872' post='2131440'] Thanks. I'll certainly play them before buying. I just want to avoid travelling to see every candidate I see advertised if I know there are era's / models that aren't likely to be what I'm after. I played a rather prominent player's '65 last week & it's neck is in a different class to that on my '72 (which is a nice bass - also with binding by the way). I also played another '72 last week & it's neck was only slightly slimmer than mine (not what I'm after) but still a different class to the '65. Interesting the comment above re a '68 with a very slim neck (so perhaps it's possible a post CBS neck can be as thin as a pre-CBS?). Keen to hear more views. Apparently there were A, B, C (maybe D) necks of varying width ACROSS the neck (E to G strings) - do we think any of these are likely to have a thinner neck? Appreciate the contributions. [/quote] As far as I know ( and I am no expert on old Fenders , by any means ) , the A, B and C width necks were primarily an option for Precision Basses , rather than Jazz Basses that tended to have a uniform 1.5 inch nut width .

[quote name='lowdown' timestamp='1372887742' post='2131341'] Any one remember lugging these about with a P or a Jazz? And taking out the passenger front seat to get it all in.... [size=4][url="http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/826/hqa4.jpg/"][/url][/size] [url="http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/842/9jm4.jpg/"][/url] [/quote] I remember these being in the shop when I first started playing and wishing I could afford one !

[quote name='skychaserhigh' timestamp='1372878778' post='2131132'] I watched vampire weekend doing their set , that was truly dire. They also have beards. [/quote] A lot of musicians have beards at the moment . Far too many , in fact . Vampire Weekend were indeed abysmal .

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1372867286' post='2130946'] Wal bass & a general air of smug superiority. [/quote] This, too .

[quote name='Wil' timestamp='1372867012' post='2130941'] Headless Status and high wasteband Warwick Thumb and carpel tunnel Rickenbacker and a deep sense of regret [/quote] This

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1372872894' post='2131050'] Eurrgh! [/quote] Steady , now !

This is recent photograph of me , Larry . I hope I am your type .

[quote name='MisterFingers' timestamp='1372871736' post='2131027'] He just can't stop can he? I think he's grooming you for some ugly P-bass pleasure Dingus! [/quote] I certainly hope so ! I love you , Larry . Stop stroking that bass and come and stroke me !

I first met Lemmy when I was eleven years old , and he had been caining it for decades even back then . I am now well into my fourties and he has been caining it for all the years inbetween . The man is indestructable , but get well soon , anyway .

[quote name='timeworksV2' timestamp='1372859599' post='2130799'] Hey "Dingus" YOU are a NATURAL for [i][b]resident asshole[/b][/i]; here and elsewhere! [/quote] Yes Larry . I'm an asshole . I should have known better than have tried to hide it from your ferocious intelligence , Larry . I wish I was as cool like you are , but I know I will always just be a sad geek who can't play the bass for sh*t compared to you . The truth is , Larry , that I think I might be a little bit in love with you . Does that mean I might be gay ? I have certainly never felt this way about any man before now but it is just another sign of what an amazing man you are Larry . When I saw that photograph of you on the Fender forum I got very excited in a very unusual way , if you know what I mean As well as being very clever and talented you are a[u][i] very[/i][/u] handsome man , but I know in my heart of hearts that you are way out of my league . I may be an asshole , but my asshole belongs to you Larry . I'm your bitch now . Treat me like the slut I am !

[quote name='AndyTravis' timestamp='1372671929' post='2128254'] Bit of a debate going on... Black Pickguard, or keep the white...or Torty, or white pearl?! [/quote] Keep the white !

[quote name='icastle' timestamp='1372804931' post='2130314'] Larry the Lame has unexpectedly had to leave us. [/quote] That's a shame

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1372804047' post='2130308'] With that kind of service, it's a pity that Strings Direct don't sell any of the bass strings I like to use... [/quote] I have problems getting the strings I like , too .

[quote name='timeworks' timestamp='1372801178' post='2130267'] I'm not your firend, and you are absolutely incapable of "thought". Can't you read?? [/quote] He's back ! ( Again ) . I f***ing love this guy !

[quote name='Undertone' timestamp='1372794008' post='2130163'] Hi - I'd appreciate tapping all you knowledgeable people out there. I have a '72 Jazz bass whose neck is kind of chunky & I'd like to move to an earlier model but am unsure as to how far I need to go back to get a significantly slimmer neck. I mean smaller distance from front of fingerboard to back of neck, say at the 12th fret or something I suppose - whatever's common sense. By signfiicantly slimmer, let's use 1961-1965 or a subset thereof as a benchmark (acknowledging there's probably variation within this period, but guessing that this variation is probably small relative to the width difference between this period & my '72). Another factor is cost, since jumping from 1966 to pre-1966 is accompanied by a material increase in price (refins are fine but the price still jumps). If I really have to go for 1961-65 then so be it. (I recognise there are plenty modern alternatives out there & have been exploring these too, probably for a 5-string...) So, do folks know, is a pre-'66 neck materially thinner than a '66? than a '67? than a 68?... I'm sure someone has specs out there, which I'll also find interesting, but am equally interested in feedback from folks who've played them, as feel is as important (if not more). Many thanks. [/quote] In my experience , there is huge variation in the profile of old Fender necks , and it seems like no two feel completely the same . As I understand it , the manually - controlled lathes that Fender were using back gave a degree of variation from one batch of necks to the next , depending onthe finer points of how the operator had set the controls . That said , generally speaking later Sixties Jazz necks had slightly less depth towards the twelth fret than many early 60's examples , that tended to get very slightly fatter towards the top end of the neck . From '74 Fender went with a fatter , more "U" shaped profile . Given the imprecise nature of Fender's manufacturing techniques at the time , any specs are likely to be a guideline , at best .

[quote name='MetricMike' timestamp='1372789175' post='2130059'] I always thought of this forum as reasonably well informed, but some of the comments on this thread verge on comic parody. As far as I can tell no-one commenting on this thread (up till now) was there and so are basing their opinions on a tv mix of less than half of the full show. This is my favourite........ [b]You don't know, you cannot judge - you have never seen them live!! [/b] I was in the crowd at Glastonbury and my opinion (for what it's worth) they more than lived up to the hype. Jagger in particular exceeded all expectations and only his face showed his age. Yes, there were a few dodgy moments but in general they kept a huge crowd thoroughly entertained and while I have seen crowds dancing and jumping around before, never have I seen such a wild spontaneous outburst of dancing as when "Satisfaction" started. This was a legendary band, on a legendary stage at a legendary event - the Stones lived up to that! [/quote] Would you describe the Stones as legends ?

Wine bar is good !

[quote name='the boy' timestamp='1372774323' post='2129763'] I'm a weak fool. It's like my misspent youth all over again. Why couldn't I say no? Why can't I still? Am I temptations bitch? Is there nothing of me in my own life? Am I to be forever at sea adrift without a rudder? Is a whim my only compass? The North Star I am not. I have no fixed or resting quality. I have reached the end of the garden path and there is no one left to hold my hand, I am alone. What now? [/quote] The more I read your posts , the more mysterious you become .