thisnameistaken

[quote name='hamfist' timestamp='1357139901' post='1917978'] Now for me, a BIG negative for the G & L system is the lack of a blending facility. The choice of pickups soloed or a 50:50 mix is too limiting for many. [/quote] Fair enough. I've never owned one and I don't even like the look of them but each time I pick one up I think it would be a very useful bass to have.

I think the most versatile bass I've used is the G&L L2000. And it doesn't really have any downright useless sounds in there either, so it manages to be versatile and easy to use at the same time, quite a nifty feat. I wish they weren't so plain looking though.

If it's a song I like I'll just work out the changes from the record. If it's a song I don't like then I say 'I'm not playing that'. Elton John? Yeah it might be a classic but I'm not doing it. I don't care who wants to hear it, tell them to do one. I said no.

When I was too poor to own two basses I only had one. That situation went on for years and years! Now I've got two. There are a couple of others I would like but they would cost more money than my conscience would let me spend. I do also have two double basses but they each have their uses, although the busking bass has got dusty since it's done nothing but rain for six months.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1356878283' post='1914595']And here for me is where all these systems fall down. You will have to modify your playing technique to get anything useful out of them, especially if you plan to use them outside of a studio environment.[/quote] You're right, but having done that with analogue pitch-tracking pedals and envelope-following effects for years I've found it isn't enough to put me off. I had a GK3-B pickup fitted to a Jazz earlier this year, it was good fun, and I did use it live once or twice with a GR-30. I found the tracking performance with the GK-3B to be surprisingly good but the GR-30 was a pain to program (I don't like Roland's interfaces) so I sold it. I thought about getting a better synth but in the end it seemed like too much of an expense when I was already getting a lot of the sounds I wanted from my effect pedals.

His stuff for Galliano is really low-key, he keeps it really simple. Push tunes are hard to find.

I don't like Incognito they're a bit 'smooth'. I do like Ernie's playing with Push and Galliano though, he was a big influence on me when I was starting out.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1356734637' post='1913151'] I'd given up as everytime I'd given a good reason it was entirely ignored and I was asked for another one. Maybe it's true that drugs mess with your brain. [/quote] If you're happy that you've stated your case then that's fine - I'm happy to concede that you're happy with your beliefs and there's no real point in arguing. My position is that the law as a concept should be a formalisation of how a group of people agree that they ought to behave, and current anti-drug legislation is out of step with how the majority feel about drug use. Additionally the enforcement of these laws has only had a negative effect on drug users - not a positive effect on non-users. And that changing access to these substances would benefit everybody in society and put a huge gaping hole in the finances of organised crime. I am not saying 'Let me smoke weed in the street'. I don't smoke weed. Nor am I saying 'Let me drive my car all wasted' - there are enough drunks who do that already. To be honest I rarely even get drunk these days.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1356718196' post='1912926'] People creating a public nuisance and taking up police and ambulance resources is the main concern. [/quote] Irresponsible drunk people are already a public nuisance and take up police and ambulance resources. Telling them they can smoke weed instead isn't going to make them a bigger nuisance.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1356716072' post='1912907']No, no yet today. Wrong time of year and all that. But I do have my own policy of "not a drop" if I am driving, always have since the day I passed my test.[/quote] I don't drive if I've had a single pint either. Nor have I ever driven under the influence of the vast amounts of prohibited drugs I used to take. Just because someone likes to get shitfaced it doesn't mean they are inconsiderate towards others.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1356715527' post='1912897'] Tightening doesn't neccesarily mean restricting.[/quote] You would struggle to find a thesaurus that doesn't list them as synonyms, but whatever... [quote name='TimR' timestamp='1356715527' post='1912897']We have alcohol laws that haven't been (but are beginning to be) enforced strongly. How are we going to ensure that the drugs laws would be?[/quote] Policing is an entirely unrelated argument. I think when laws are made it's expected that they will be enforced. Except perhaps the fox hunting ban. [quote name='Dr.Dave' timestamp='1356715634' post='1912898']I expect , though , that that debate will have less effect on me and my views than the next time - which will be the third time - when I have to ring in the dead , soiled drug user I find in the stairwells of my workplace.[/quote] You're finding dead drug users all over the place and you don't think it's worth reconsidering our attitudes to drug addicts? Are you saying that you think they deserve to die because they took drugs despite government campaigns to educate them about the risks? Off on a tangent a bit: I do wish the government would stop publishing lies about what prohibited drugs do to people. I think a lot of people experiment with drugs because they know what the government is telling them is a lot of bollocks. If they simply presented people with the truth I think people would be a lot safer.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1356714439' post='1912876']Me too, entirely - it's the effects, often fatal, on innocent strangers that are the truly unjust parts of it. Many laws are there for that reason.[/quote] I agree. How many people last year were killed by sober drivers? We should ban driving, it ruins lives. How many people were killed last year by drivers who were high on magic mushrooms? If it's none then let's go ahead and legalise them. [quote name='TimR' timestamp='1356714513' post='1912877'] It just amazes me that at a time when we should be tightening alcohol laws, some people are advocating loosening drug laws. [/quote] Why should we be restricting alcohol? The vast majority of people manage to enjoy alcohol without causing any problems. [quote name='SteveK' timestamp='1356714932' post='1912887'] I'll wager I'm a more law abiding citizen than all of you put together ... paragon of virtue, me!.. prove me wrong [/quote] I'm a pretty decent person I think. I help my neighbours, I donate blood regularly, until recently I used to volunteer for a local childrens charity. I wouldn't describe myself as 'law-abiding' though, I'm not a total mug... I also don't believe in god, which confused the staunchly Catholic Italian man I found who'd fallen down drunk outside my door so I carried him home. How could I have any morals if I didn't believe in god? He urged me to start going to church - I just thought it was funny.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1356712424' post='1912824']I obey any law that is relevant to my actions at that time and that which I am aware exists; it's as much as any responsible person does.[/quote] So you have never broken the speed limit? I guess you don't have a driving license.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1356709832' post='1912768'] It's the use of the word "everyone" that is wrong. Not "everyone" does, just "some".[/quote] 'Some' being the overwhelming majority. Would you say more than half of the drivers you know have never broken the speed limit or parked illegally, for example? Apparently 1/3 of people over 16 in Britain have tried smoking cannabis, so I'd be surprised if anything other than a tiny fraction have never knowingly broken any laws at all. I think there are plenty of good people about, but I don't think any of them are entirely law-abiding.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1356705091' post='1912667']Fixed it for you, otherwise you wouldn't raise an eyebrow if you were broken into & robbed; mugged, or whatever else.[/quote] You're either being facetious or you are bad at thinking.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1356701368' post='1912587']A civilised society doesn't pick & choose which laws it wants to follow or not.[/quote] Nonsense. Everybody picks and chooses which laws they agree with and intend to follow, and those which they think are pointless/frivolous/unreasonable/unfair and will break at will.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1356697602' post='1912502'] Why would you need to rehabilitate someone taking a legal substance? If you're an alcoholic you're not forced to give it up. If you look at the Portugal example where apparently drugs have been 'legalised' (they haven't) they have very strong enforcement. If you are found with drugs then you have a choice, voluntary rehabillitation or prison (with enforced rehabilitation). I believe (have been told anecdotally) that in the UK the rehabilitation of drug users has improved massively in the last 10 years. I believe licencing drugs isn't the way to go, you'll just shift the alcohol problems into drug territory. As we've seen countless times before, theory is all well and good, but humans don't behave theoretically. If they did then the economy would be nice and stable. [/quote] I am doing my best to read and comprehend your posts but it seems none of what you've posted so far contains any argument for the prolonged prohibition of recreational drugs. Even the government can't put together a coherent argument for it. Presumably if they do have one, it's something they're not willing to share with the electorate. Perhaps it's like the situation in the USA where the CIA appear to be one of their biggest importers of cocaine.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1356638024' post='1911960']You're effectively saying that being addicted to alcohol and being addicted to cocaine are essentially the same thing.[/quote] What would you say are the important differences? In my experience the drug with the most destructive effect on users' lives - at least here in the UK - is heroin. But that's as much to do with the quality of supply and the suppliers as it is the nature of the addiction, and either way we've got people who are addicted to heroin so would you rather criminalise them or rehabilitate them? Cocaine is not massively problematic at all.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1356625663' post='1911770']I suspect that will be down to the numbers of users you know/knew. Practically every adult in the UK drinks. 4% are addicts, another large percentage are problem drinkers and even more are heavy drinkers. If you license drugs (alcohol is NOT legal, it's licenced) you send a clear message that it's ok. I suspect that instead of 4% addicted to alcohol, that 4% will just be divided up. Drugs use would increase but alcohol use may decrease at the same time. You would just have less alcohol problems but more drugs problems - whether that is good or bad is another question.[/quote] Well either way you have the same proportion of dysfunctional substance abusers, so legalisation wouldn't be detrimental to society in terms of health care or welfare. The main difference would be that the drugs currently being imported and sold by criminal gangs would be available through legal markets, so you'd have less money in the hands of organised crime and more in the treasury. When you then factor in the affect on the drug addicted of making this change, well, it's clearly going to be better for them. Less chance of getting poisoned, considerably lower likelihood of being exploited by criminals to feed their habit, higher availability of appropriate treatment for those who seek treatment which should lead to less theft/burglary, etc. Look up the opinions of Prof. David Nutt who was an advisor on drug policy to the last Labour government and whose professional advice was completely ignored because it wasn't seen to be politically appropriate.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1356615211' post='1911639']This is something the pro drugs people don't understand. Just because you do something and can control your use doesn't mean vast numbers of society in general can. Just look at alcohol.[/quote] I think 'Just look at alcohol' is precisely what the pro-legalisation people have done. Yes it causes problems, and it's arguably more problematic than most of the recreational drugs that are prohibited, and the prohibition puts users of those drugs in harm's way. The argument for legalisation is that it will put a big hole in the income streams of organised crime, increase the general well-being of drug users, and generally be a much cheaper and more civilised way for society to cope with those who choose to use recreational drugs. It's difficult to see any benefits of prohibition. [quote name='shizznit' timestamp='1356609581' post='1911563']When you are away from home for long periods you do get incredibly bored and home sick and I can understand how some musicians get sucked into drugs and booze.[/quote] To be honest when I took a lot of drugs it was mostly because I was interested in trying them, and the ones I enjoyed I was interested in trying again. It had nothing to do with other aspects of my lifestyle really - I would've done it anyway. I've known very few recreational drug users who have become a burden to society - either on the NHS or through turning to crime to fund their habits. Those people usually have bigger problems that they have not had adequate assistance with, and they turn to drugs for respite from their problems. The same way that most homeless people aren't homeless because they drink a lot. You have to get the cause and effect relationship the right way round.

A drug addiction - reinforced by withdrawal symptoms - is quite a different kettle of fish to an obsessive pursuit of an activity. I would say if you think you'd find it impossible to stop playing music, you definitely shouldn't try heroin.

I've got one of [url="http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0002GL7ZO/?tag=hydra0b-21&hvadid=9550943109&ref=asc_df_B0002GL7ZO"]these[/url] Gator bags which carries a ton of stuff and has a front pocket for more damageable things like DB preamps, clip-on tuners and so on. Lately I've been putting a 1m speakon and an IEC cable in the front pocket of my Shuttle gig bag just so I don't have to fish them out of the big bag.

I don't think the idea of remembering songs where the melody features a specific interval is particularly useful. Where is that knowledge going to be used? If you don't recognise a particular interval are you going to hum each of those tunes in your head until you find the right one? I don't know that listening alone would be useful either. I think the key is to think in terms of intervals all the time. So if you play a Bb over a G minor you know you're playing a minor 3rd, the same as if you played a G over E minor, a C over A minor, etc. As an exercise to try to internalise what the different intervals sound like, I would recommend learning bass parts from records using your ears rather than tab. This may seem like hopeless trial-and-error at first but that's the whole point - it's a key skill you need to practise to get your ears to hear the intervals and help you find them on your instrument. Start with the most common chord tones - both thirds, dominant fifth, dominant seventh, octave. You don't have to memorise all of them at once (or even at all!) but learning those important ones (and you'll find they are easy to recognise because they are so common) will make finding all the others much easier. Have fun.

[quote name='George Martin' timestamp='1356453770' post='1910318'] Just saw this and thought i might be able to help. The main thing to remember about the top nut is that as soon as you put your finger on the string to make a note the height of the top nut becomes irrelevant so the height of the nut only affects the open strings. [/quote] I guess a high nut could also affect your intonation to some extent but it would have to be pretty high to have a big effect. I've only ever had that problem on a cheap soprano uke though, not a double bass...

I'm kind of alright for bass gear really. Among the CDs that arrived is Bootsy's 'Funk Capital Of The World' though, if that counts.