MiltyG565

Generally, I avoid bass-only songs like a plague, as I can usually see nothing more in them than a show of skill, which is cool, but not for me. This, however, I love. Granted, the lyrics aren't fantastic, but I think overall the song is great. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpCMH43VlQU

[quote name='plumbob' timestamp='1435472974' post='2809010'] This guy pretty much sums up the media industry , baring in mind this was uploaded in 2007, so god knows what its like now ! [url="https://youtu.be/mj5IV23g-fE"]https://youtu.be/mj5IV23g-fE[/url] [/quote] This still happens. I know a guy, who earns his living from teaching and playing in pubs at the weekends, who was approached and asked if he wanted to do a support gig for a popular local country singer (who charges top-dollar). "How much does it pay?" says he. "Your reward is free publicity" says them. "I'm running a business, I need paid." says he. And then I'm told that the other guy got quite upset that this musician was demanding to be paid, ranting about how much of an opportunity he was passing up, and how the publicity was far more valuable than what he wanted paid. Obviously, he never played the support gig. Presumably they went off and found somebody a little more wet behind the ears to do it for free. And they'll be doing that at every gig they play. And it's not like these guys can't afford to pay. I'm reliably informed they're charging £10k-£15k, and taking 30% of the ticket sales. The guy who turned it down charges more in the region of £300 for around 3 hours entertainment.

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1435441152' post='2808883'] Outstanding post and one with which no reasonable man could disagree. [/quote] Thank you. Although I do recognise that your abridged version of my post puts the point across in a much more succinct way. I've just read my post out on Periscope, just to make people aware, and I've also prattled on for an hour about the importance of valuing your time and labour in whatever you're doing.

[quote name='plumbob' timestamp='1434957275' post='2804024'] Whether you like her or not I think this young lady has bigger gonads than a lot of established stars . Definietily has her head switched on , and not the first time she has made a stand , if we had more people like this perhaps the music industry business model for artists wouldn't be the shambles that it currently is ! [url="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-33220189"]http://www.bbc.co.uk...t-arts-33220189[/url] [/quote] Alright, I'm going to pin my colours up right now. I'm an Apple fan. I like their computers, laptops, and phones. I think they're easy to use and they integrate very well with my lifestyle. I like them so much that I've recently received an order worth £3,000 of new Apple gear. But I'm also a music fan, and have been for many years. I've been working in the music industry for a while now, and been a keen observer for much longer. I'm a hobby musician myself. But along with that, I'm a businessman. I study business. I'm involved in business. To me, music and business are 2 things that can co-exist harmoniously (but sometimes don't, I admit). And I want music and business to exist together, because I love them both. They both give me a sense of fulfilment. Given my knowledge and experience on all 3 aspects of this particular situation (Apple, Music industry, business practices), what really winds me up the complete f***ing wrong way is when spotty little idiots who haven't had to deal with the pressures of business, or know anything about the music industry, try to tell me that Taylor Swift is wrong to demand royalty payments for the free trials. Everyone needs to know - Taylor Swift was not wrong. She may not need the money. She may be wrong on a lot of other things, but here, she has hit the nail on the head. We're all aware of the pressures that musicians face with so many shysters asking to use music/play gigs for free under the guise of "free publicity", we all know that streaming services offer woeful remuneration to the artists themselves (although make major bucks for the labels). This is probably one of the toughest times to be a fully committed artist if you aren't on a major label. And I don't think there's enough recognition that recording your first album [i]is not the start of your music career[/i]. Up until any recording artists releases their first album, they'll have had to deal with years of practice, years of playing in pubs, and trying to make a name for themselves. Years of dedicated musicianship and a massive personal investment in personal growth, and in equipment. Then they'll have had to deal with actually trying to be a legit musician. Trying to make a living from that. Seeing every little step as a success in itself. You made £250 from Spotify last year? Good on you, chap! It's not a lot, but it's a step in the right direction! It's tough. Some on here know that. Earning enough from people listening to your music for you to support yourself and your career... that doesn't happen overnight. And regardless of who the artist is or whether I like their music, well done to them, because that's commitment. That's a level of risk that I wouldn't take. And there's just not enough respect for that. That some companies would approach those people and say "Can we use this? We won't pay you, but you'll get free publicity!", as if 1) publicity will turn into payment and 2) these companies couldn't already afford to pay for the music, that's simply disrespectful and downright underhand. Now let me give you some facts about Apple. Apple comes under fire for making everything out of aluminium, rather than plastic. Does anybody know why that is? Aluminium is hard-wearing, durable, and above all, highly recyclable. When my computer is done, it can be melted down and the aluminium can be reused. They'll get >98% of the aluminium back out of it, and save a great deal of energy by recycling it. Apple also excludes many harmful chemicals from its production, making nearly the entire computer recyclable and non-harmful at the end of its life. Apple also supports many humanitarian causes, and puts pressure on their suppliers in China to raise the working conditions like no other company can. I'm not saying Apple are perfect, but they clearly do have ethics. And I see it as a great insult to the people who make music their life's work, and to me as a consumer of music, to not fairly remunerate these musicians for the playbacks of their music. Apple will lose money for this, but let's remember that they are one of the largest companies in the world, and have billions in cash reserves. At this point, Apple could literally buy any company that it wants, and that is not hyperbole. Let's also remember that Apple must bear the burden of investment in their new service. They're the ones who created it. They're the ones who stand to make most from it. Not the musicians. Anyone who attacks a musician because they want the royalties during the free trial is a moron. It's Apple's business - the investment is theirs. The musician already invested so much in their musical abilities. Also - who gives a 3 month free trial anyway? Honestly, I've never seen that before. Most offer 1 month free, and that's enough to get people hooked. Honestly, I feel so let down by 1) Apple, who have a reputation of supporting creative types, 2) Apple fans who moronically nod and say "Seems fair to me", and 3) people who have no knowledge of the music industry or business feeling that they're appropriately equipped to give a well-rounded opinion on the subject (i.e. those still saying Swift is wrong, and Apple are wrong to now pay royalties during the free trial). In closing, I have no doubt that Apple's music streaming service will be a big success. Apple just draws a crowd on whatever it does. I also have no doubt that the remuneration for artists will be better. But do not give me this bullshit about it being too expensive for Apple to pay royalties during the free trial. If a company wants to give away something for free, that's fine, but don't try to make other people foot the bill for it. Apple can well afford it, and shame on them for trying to get out of paying artists, and shame on anyone who says Taylor Swift shouldn't have made the case.

[quote name='mrtcat' timestamp='1435220283' post='2806546'] That's excellent. We all know how rewarding it is to create music and it should be available to absolutely everyone. [/quote] Absolutely!

There are a lot of people out there right now trying to make creating music more accessible, by removing the barriers that people with physical limitations face with traditional instruments, and I think this is a great thing. http://makezine.com/2015/06/22/developing-musical-instruments-people-physical-disabilities/ And even though these instruments are designed to break down the barriers for people with limitations, I think they serve a wider purpose again, being an instrument in their own right (frankly, I want one of them!), and perhaps breaking down the barriers for people who often say things like "I couldn't play guitar, I can't do that with my hands". These instruments are often great and practical in so many ways, and I hope this is the start of a musical journey for many people.

[quote name='Iain' timestamp='1433597958' post='2792421'] I was so unimpressed with their Neons I put them on a bass I never play... [/quote] DR have a very retro appeal, but as far as I can work out, that's about it. Their coatings don't measure up against the kind of coatings that others are doing, and unless you want coloured strings (because you for some reason love a gimmick), you probably aren't going to buy DR. Some people like them. I've used them before on guitar, and they're OK. But their production and branding and everything feels old-fashioned in a market that's moving along fairly quickly. [quote name='ubit' timestamp='1433478037' post='2791376'] Yes, I have tried Elixirs. As I said before, the acoustic guitar Elixirs are amazing. Bright and stay bright for ages. The bass strings I find to be dull sounding. Not nearly as bright as stainless! [/quote] Interesting. Have you tried their steel bass strings? The brightest strings on the market are D'Addario FlexSteels. If that's the kind of brightness you like, sorry but you're not going to find it elsewhere.

[quote name='pfretrock' timestamp='1433337069' post='2790192'] But there is quite a difference between £47, what they usually go for, and £30. Hence the excitement. I'm also puzzled how (or why) Thomann have that price. (perhaps they're Dekos ) [/quote] It doesn't make sense for them to have that price, even if they are buying them cheaper than everyone else. Even if they sold them for £35 a set, with their £10 postage, they're still more competitive that anyone in the local market can afford to be. And thanks for confirming my point about the excitement of them being £30

[quote name='miles'tone' timestamp='1433322994' post='2790018'] No way it will cost Thomann £10 to post some strings, therefore they most probably receive £35-36 for each set. I wonder if they are just selling them at cost that way? [/quote] They won't be selling at cost. They'll be making a profit. It's beyond me exactly how they are managing it, though.

[quote name='Maude' timestamp='1433286974' post='2789851'] I think the loss leader thing does work online, as long as the seller is charging postage in the way that Thomann do. £30 for the strings, then add the flat rate postage, suddenly not massively cheaper than elsewhere, unless you pop a couple other things in your order to make it worthwhile, oh hang on I've just spent a load more than I planned to. [/quote] Perhaps. It's a pretty underhand way to treat your customers though. Let's hope that's not Thomann's approach.

[quote name='fretmeister' timestamp='1433246223' post='2789279'] FWIW - I never thought Thomastiks were worth the RRP anyway. [/quote] Most don't charge RRP, however most also can't even begin to imagine selling these strings for £30 a pop. It's a race to the bottom. If these strings were considered to be worth less than what they're usually sold at, there wouldn't be so much excitement around them being sold for £30.

[quote name='Thunderbird' timestamp='1433245441' post='2789269'] I see where you are coming from Milty but the trouble is people only have limited cash so price is a big factor [/quote] Sorry, but high-quality strings have a high-quality price. One can't expect to get a set of strings that normally cost £54 for £30. As I said previously, I can't even get myself a set for £30, and I work in the industry. As I said earlier - I don't stock these strings, and don't plan to anytime soon. My issue isn't about losing trade and loyal customers.

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1433243049' post='2789221'] That's fair enough - and thanks for sharing your concerns! Unless they are using the strings as some kind of loss-leader, this pricing makes little sense. [/quote] I've expressed my concerns about loss-leaders before, too. I don't think they work in the online retail world, and I think Thomann know that. I have no idea how or if they're making money from these strings.

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1433239855' post='2789156'] The benefits of bulk-buying I presume? But what do you mean by "use caution" Milty? Are you implying that these strings are not what they claim to be, or that buying at this price is in some way hazardous? I don't understand... [/quote] Even bought in massive quantities, these strings can't be sold at this price. I've heard that Thomastik aren't happy with Thomann selling them at this price, and Thomastik aren't supplying Thomann directly. This isn't some kind of friendly little deal between neighbours. To give you a feel for the price of these strings - I can't buy these strings through official distribution chains for as little as Thomann (and others) are selling them at. That leaves me with a big question - Exactly how are they selling them at this price? I have no idea, but I won't be touching them. I don't sell Thomastik, and have no plans to stock them anytime soon, so I have no dog in this fight, but I don't think it would be very good of me to have such doubts about these things and not tell you guys.

[quote name='MoJo' timestamp='1433015415' post='2787134'] I've just picked up a 'Crafted in Korea' Squier Precision. What is the difference between that and a 'Made in Korea' Squier Precision? [/quote] "crafted" sounds more prestige... that's it. Marketing.

[quote name='bassmayhem' timestamp='1432982605' post='2786734'] Check this: [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/thomastik_jf344.htm"]http://www.thomann.d...astik_jf344.htm[/url] [/quote] Guys - Please use caution when buying. I cannot see how these strings can be sold at that price. They're high quality, and have a price tag that reflects that.

[quote name='ubit' timestamp='1432924317' post='2786310'] I obviously have sweaty, dirt infested slimy paws plus a desire for a bright, fresh twang on my strings, because I can never understand people who say they change strings every 2 or 3 years or even months, or weeks for that matter. I struggle to get more than 3 gigs out of a set of strings, before the lifeless, distorted boominess becomes more than I can handle and I have to change them! [/quote] Have you tried Elixirs? Or D'Addario EXP.

[quote name='Skybone' timestamp='1432138103' post='2778530'] there's loads of great gear out there around £100-200. [/quote] Absolutely. We've had SX Jazz basses in. They're around £250, but you honestly would never think "That's clearly a £250 bass". I was very impressed with it, and certainly let our supplier know. My boss took one home to keep - I've never seen him do that before. If any of you ever find one in a shop, try it out, you'll see what I mean.

[quote name='Naetharu' timestamp='1432137227' post='2778520'] Hi folks, I've just started playing bass. At the moment I am using an old (1990s I think) Squire Jazz Bass that a friend has lent me. I'm hoping to go and purchase my own bass and amp this weekend and I am looking for a few tips as to what I should be looking for. I'm not looking for advice on which bass brand/model as such, but rather what I should be looking at to make my mind up when it comes to the basses I try. As a newbie I'm not sure how to judge if a bass is good or not, and so I thought I would try and tap some wisdom here rather than making a mistake that I only come to realise later on. I have around £400 to spend on the bass, so does anyone have a few tips about what I should be looking out for when it comes to basses that are around that price range? For example, I know with guitars that lighter weight Strats are preferred as they tend to sing better than their heavier counterparts, and that fixed bridges are nice for beginners since they are easier to tune etc. Are there any important tips about basses in general that I should be aware of when I go to get my one? Many thanks for your help James [/quote] Tips on how to find a good instrument? Just one - Let it find you. Regardless of level of ability, you'll find something that feels right to you. If you're an absolute n00b, just go for the one that feels the best to play. That's much more important than almost anything else in the start.

[quote name='Hobbayne' timestamp='1432423234' post='2781408'] The guy who played 'Needles' in the Back To The Future movies is actually quite a good bass player. [/quote] I wonder what happened to that guy...

I heard that Paul McCartney fella is quite good on bass.