xgsjx

[quote name='Jack Cahalane' timestamp='1410172448' post='2546712'] Oasis' first bass player Guigsy was so bad he didn't even play on their first album according to the original drummer's book, it was after he left around 2000 and replaced by Andy Bell (brilliant guitarist) that the bass started to move away from the root notes and get a bit more creative , probably due to Noel letting the others contribute a bit more to the songwriting around the same time as well. Like you said though, their music was never focussed on the instrumental side of things! [/quote] I didn't know that (though I was never a fan, but I did have their first album).

[quote name='Jack Cahalane' timestamp='1410168948' post='2546660'] I wouldn't say every song, some of their later stuff and a few early B-sides had some decent non root note only basslines. Go Let It Out Listen Up Soldier On Hung In a Bad Place To Be Where There's Life The majority of their stuff is just root notes though. [/quote] Sounds like the bassist got to put his own thing down, maybe? TBH I didn't think any of them had a bassline that I would remember, let alone want to learn. I know they wanted to sound like the Beatles, but every member of the Beatles was a talented musician. Taxman is one of my fave songs of theirs & I struggle to play the bassline. It could have been a simple root note affair, but they settled for better.

Have you considered Shep's MP-201 in the classifieds? It's the be all-end all of expression pedals.

Oasis are like most singer songwriter acts, it's all about the vocals. The music is there to provide a canvas, it's not part of the artwork. The bassline is there just to do a simple foundation. They could have easily have had better basslines on every oasis song.

If you're using your fx send & return, then the send is the output that goes to the input of your first pedal. The out from the last pedal in your chain then goes into the return. However, with pedals it is usually to plug the bass straight in to the first pedal & then the out from the last pedal should go to the input on your amp & not sing the fx loop at all. The reason? The fx loop is usually designed for rack fx, which have a different line level. So some pedals may not work as well in the loop as they would in line. As for pedal order... Mikebass says it all, there is no right or wrong.

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1410052085' post='2545735'] That's a low blow! Oasis would have replaced Guigsy in a heart beat, or at least brought in another bass player for the record, if he hadn't played exactly what they wanted. [/quote] I thought Liam played the bass on the record?

You could possibly pick up a 2nd hand Korg M50 for @ £400. Has a fully fledged sequencer & a good palette of sounds.

But there's also loads of Coldplay & Snow Patrol fans who would say the opposite (I find both rather bland). Free had some great basslines. With music, for non musicians (e.g. most people), it's solely about the finished sound & how they can connect with it, not how technical it is. For most rockers a great song has a guitar riff (or maybe even a bass riff) at the start, then the music comes on full & then falls back a notch to allow the singer to assist the listener in his/her vocal abilities. A solo to allow for some air guitar & then back to the final verse (usually the 1st verse again, but not always). It doesn't matter how technical the bassline is, but I do think that there's many bands who could have put a bit more effort into the basslines.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1409988473' post='2545136'] Hey dont get me wrong I went to the Yanek Gwizdala workshop!, I dont mind a bit of twiddling but it has to be right for the gig, If I had gone to see Yanek and he showed us a few Coldplay numbers I would have wanted my money back on the other hand AC/DC have done rather well without any two handed tapping, in fact instead of watching one guy tapping Cliff Williams got millions of peoples feet tapping! I dont think they will be too worried about xgsjx's lack of purchases due to a lack of fourths and 9ths missing. [/quote] I agree. Just because I find them a bit boring after a while doesn't mean they are rubbish. They know how to sell. Write good riffs & keep the groove simple. I myself preferred Van Halen to ACDC as their basslines was equally as simple, but more fun to play when learning.

[quote name='Damonjames' timestamp='1409949124' post='2544996'] I am rediscovering some music I would have possibly condemned in the past based on the fact it was root note only type bass lines. The simple fact is this: Sometimes, that is all that is required. There are many players, granted most from a bygone era, that made a career out of this type of playing (cliff williams springs to mind) the fact is that it "is all that is required", could you imagine ACDC with an over complicated bass line? It just wouldn't work. The important thing I think is, Don't assume that the bass player only played root notes because that's all they knew how to play. Someone else has alread mentioned, it does take great restraint and focus to do this style of playing (if you know anything about the instrument you are playing of course!) [/quote] Or a severe lack of imagination. If ACDC would have put some thought into the basslines, I might have bought more than 1 album. You don't have to be a great player to come up with a decent bassline. Had Duff put a straight 8 bassline to every GnR song, people would have said "but that's all that it needed". Sweet child o mine could easily have had a Coldplay style bassline, but a little imagination & he put a bit of bass under the intro & popped some simple fills in to break the monotony. Even the most slagged off bassist has some good basslines (Adam Clayton). There's nothing wrong with playing a straight simple bassline if that's all the song needs, but to play like that for every song goes past restraint. I'm not just talking about ACDC either.

The good thing about Macca & Sting & even Adam Clayton is that they only play the root note to songs that need them. When a band does it for virtually every song, then I find I lose interest as all their songs start to sound the same (AC/DC are a prime example. Yes they have some great songs, but then they have about 15 albums that stick to the same format).

The chances of JJ knowing or caring about a 1x15 being a weak link is slim to none. Back when he started playing, he, like many others would have been lead to believe that you need the 4x10 for mids & the 1x15 for low end. The rig in the pic is mostly for visual purposes. Anytime I've added a 4x10 to my 2x10, I've had little to be gained compared to adding another 2x10. I'd heed Bill's advice.

Only you could answer that by trying one out. Personally, I'd try as many cabs as you can from every other manufacturer that you can find.

For the 4x12, you could disconnect 3 of the drivers & just connect one of the top drivers, this would give the cab a better sound for guitar. One of my previous singers at a rehearsal said "my vocal needs more bass" & went to the desk, turned up the bass & got loads of feedback. I explained to him that bass on the vocal is actually mids, turned the bass down & increased the mids & he was happy. The guitarists also need to know to leave room for the vocals. An eq pedal can be a great tool for the guitar, cutting out the mids on the lead during the vocal & bringing them back for the solos.

My tip for getting a good band sound is to turn the bass down on the guitars. If they turn it back up, swap instruments with them.

[quote name='KingBollock' timestamp='1409582165' post='2541117'] I bet these could use it... http://youtu.be/WIKqgE4BwAY [/quote] That's 2 styles of music I never ever expected to hear put together! Makes me think of Ridge Racer for some reason.

? Most of the 2x10s I see are 8 ohm. Most 2x12s I see are 4 ohm, but either could be gotten in 4 or 8 ohm, brand depending.

[quote name='spacey' timestamp='1409580718' post='2541097'] Think speaker inches. 1x15 is 15 inches of paper moving air. 4x10 is 40 inches moving air. In a cab the same size it's a no brainier the 4x10 will win. A 4x10 and 2x10 that can be used at smaller gigs + rehearsals is good if you can get a 8 ohm 2x10 or they end up doing the work whilst the 4x10 idles. You have combinations then. Rehearsal/ small gig 2x10 Pub gig 4x10 huge gig 4x10 +2x10 [/quote] Not quite, but the sentiment is right. It's how much mass is being covered. 4 10's are covering more mass than a 15, but not almost 3 times as much. A 15 will have slightly more mass than a 2x10. There's another recent thread on here about the downside of adding a 2x10 to a 4x10, getting an even volume to the drivers (by using either a 4Ω & 8Ω cab) & the dangers of overloading your amp. A good 2x10/12 will cover most medium sized gigs. Add another for the big gigs.

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1409563944' post='2540815'] I have an old SWR 400 which runs VERY hot and has no fan. They added them later but you'd jump if you touched the chassis after running a while. Putting them in a flight case would need some thinking about IMO to allow it to breathe. I have had it well over 20 years from new and it failed on me once when it was knocked from a cab to the ground under power. The amp tech said it was very good component spec inside ...and they were known for that way back, so I think they were built to run very hot and used quality parts to do so. I don't think you'd get those internals very easily now as that would make the amps too exensive for the market and only the very best amps could justify it. The SM400 was regarded as THE amp along with the SM900 at the time. Eden copied it, IMO and did very well with their versions, the WT series. You can pick these 'vintage' ( pre-company buy-out ) amps up for very good money now and they will be amongst the best value around IMO. [/quote] I bet there's not much built like your SWR these days. My brother has a couple of Radiovox valve PA amps from many decades ago. The build quality is probably far superior to most high end gear of today. They're still run regularly today & never has a single issue with them.

Giving a guitarist a 4x12 is not a clever move.

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1409519013' post='2540503'] Yes, that's what I don't quite follow. Shortening the life from 6 centuries to a mere 5 doesn't seem like much of an issue to me. How much 'shortening' actually takes place, does anyone know, or is this just a legend..? Are there any 'real-life' figures available..? I've never seen any, but I'm open... [/quote] It think it depends on the component & build quality of the amp. Like a well built engine will take a lot of running hard compared to your everyday engine. Ashdown Superfly is an example to start with for component failure.

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1409516989' post='2540473'] No, I was in no way suggesting that a load of less than manufacturers spec is 'safe', only that, whilst remaining above minimum load, any extra heat will not, in the reasonable life of an amp, be a factor of shortening that life. Do not run any amp at less than makers spec, at the risk of releasing the 'magic smoke'..! [/quote] That's what I was referring to, running a 4 ohm amp at 2.6 ohm. I know we've debated running at max ohms to get max watts before. Good if you're using cabs that's are gonna benefit from it, not so if you're only gaining a couple of db. Extra heat will most likely shorten the life. More current going through the components speeds up the wear & tear process (just like with anything).