4000

Ditto..

Why am I missing the point? That's how it sounds to me, unfocussed. I just don't like the style of it. But then I'm not much of a "jazz-funk" guy really, old Jamiroquai aside. To me it's usually the worst of both worlds. I'll just add that if anyone isn't "bumbling around" it's James Jamerson. Comparing the two is like comparing Danny Williams to Muhammed Ali.

Doddy, I think that's part of my problem. Tone aside, it's too laid back for me, too loose. As I've said previously, I like things that push more, that have more positive tension.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='898073' date='Jul 18 2010, 02:23 PM']Im a cheapskate and use Elites which appear alot better than Roto's for not much more money, £30 for 2 sets from Mark at Bass Direct.I only change them once a year anyway!!! A year old set of Elites still have more twang left than a week old set of old Roto's to my ears,Are there any lovers of Rotosounds out there?[/quote] Yes, as above. Elites are some of my least favourite strings, I really don't get on with them. The years where they were all I could find were hell.

[quote name='BigRedX' post='898015' date='Jul 18 2010, 01:15 PM']Rotosound Bass Strings are like Fender Bass Guitars. Superior when there wasn't much competition, but technology has moved on since the 60s and they haven't really kept up.[/quote] But not this...I find that Rotos are the best strings for my Rics, far better than anything else I've tried. It's abut matching the strings to the bass. I really like that hollow, grinding din. Tried some TI flats on an old Thumb bass at weekend; the only flats I've ever tried that I liked. A revelation. Sounded and played great.

[quote name='BigRedX' post='897948' date='Jul 18 2010, 12:00 PM']Just goes to prove that there is no definitive string choice. Only the one that's right for your playing style on a particular bass.[/quote] Ditto this.....

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='897557' date='Jul 17 2010, 08:19 PM']Don't diss the strings. They can make all the difference.[/quote] One of the truest and most accurate things ever said here. Well done that man.

[quote name='bubinga5' post='898948' date='Jul 19 2010, 02:01 PM']if this is what you would play just working out a bass line to this track, i wanna see/hear you play!!?? thats a bold statement.....ok i get what you mean, but at the end of the day its a different style with fills that are much more musical, with alot less space..im gonna hide after i say this but.....i bet Mr X could play the Zender version with his eyes closed, but i bet you Zender could not come out with the musicality that this guy does... different horses and all..[/quote] Mr X could be musically more proficient than Stu (we'll never know), but personally I find the line in that track a bit waffly. It just sounds to me like he's loosely improvising around the changes in a fairly uninvolved way. I think Stu cuts to the chase much better and drives the song much better; in Bilbo's terms it's the difference between Ray Brown and Neils-Henning Orsted Pederson. To use that old chestnut, "cleverness is no substitute for true awareness". With regards to my playing, if there's one thing I can do easily it's play a whole lot of notes. Do they mean anything and are they any good? Doubtful. . Seriously though, what I meant was I'll generally start out far too busy and notey and rein myself in gradually. I reckon I could cop Mr Xs thing far easier than Stu's though, I just can't cop Stu's feel at all. Wish I could, I love his feel on the early Jamiroquai records. Same goes for Bernard Edwards. I can play a hundred times faster than him but I'm not a 1000th of the player he was.

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='899117' date='Jul 19 2010, 04:39 PM']Not only happy to adapt, but also keen to have a go at new things.[/quote] +1. Not too sure how good at that I am, but I know that a fellow Basschater/Finnbasser was very surprised seeing me play in a different style at Moffat after seeing me in my band so I guess I'm not as one-dimensional as I often think/fear. It's a great thread actually; I've been thinking about these issues a lot recently trying to pin down why I like what I like (always a good thing to do IMO). I think I've come to the conclusion that many of the bands I like have very stylistically strong individuals basically all competing with each other; Yes would be a perfect example, as would RTF or the Who. I like the tension that creates. I remember going to see a big band gig once where the horn section were all trying to outdo each other and I loved it (I was brought up on jazz); my classically-trained then-girlfriend thought it was a shambles, which amused me no end. So I'm not sure I tend to favour the supportive role of the rhythm section so much as the challenging one. Of course there are those who favour the supportive, serving-the-song thing and that's fine. I love John McVie and Rutger Gunnarsson, but they're lucky in having such exceptional songs (IMO) to work with. In general, I tend to prefer musicians who are really going for it, as tiresome as that may be to some.

I'm bailing now before I get into trouble again. Seriously though, in addition to sonics, how much does the type of music played have an influence on this? It's something of a sweeping generalisation, but it seems like a lot of session guys tend to play what I would describe as more mainstream music, which may engage a certain type of listener more than others.

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='898224' date='Jul 18 2010, 05:42 PM']The twist to this is that, whatever style I play, I still have a tendency to sound like me.[/quote] Sadly so do I.....

When it comes down to what sort of players you prefer are sonics not a big part? I happily admit to hating Marcus's sound (yes, I went there, sorry ) which in my experience he seems to use on pretty much everything he does. If I don't like somebody's sound it's very difficult for me to get into their playing; not that I can't see beyond it, but it's about as enjoyable as trying to eat something you know might be nutritious but which tastes awful. On the other hand I love Chris Squire's sound, Stu Zender's sound, Stanley Clarke's sound etc etc, and it make them far easier for me to listen to and enjoy.

[quote name='ThomBassmonkey' post='896754' date='Jul 16 2010, 06:28 PM']Do they have to be mutually exclusive? I have my own style which I think it recognisable across a few of my originals bands, but the bits of session work I've done have required certain styles (even when writing original tunes) which I've played without any problems.[/quote] +1. However if I had to nail my colours to the mast I prefer the stylists over the session types. The Nathan East types do nothing for me to be honest, much as I respect them. I like listening to guys who have more of an individual voice, so I personally would always prefer a Geddy or a Claypool. However I tend to be a bit schizophrenic regarding my own playing; sometimes I simply want to be more versatile than I am, sometimes I simply want to have more of an original voice. As above, the aim is really to be able to do both when required, and I completely agree they needn't be mutually exclusive. EDIT: BTW, came right to this from the first page. Looks like I need to read the other pages! EDIT2: I think we all know my thoughts on Mr. Miller. I wont bother reiterating. FWIW, he'd sound terrible in Motorhead.

I love Stu's tone; the only player for the original Jamiroquai IMO. Paul's a great player (and I've told him so!) but Stu was so integral to the original band. Mr Xs playing sounds to me like the sort of thing I'd do when I was trying to work out what I was actually going to play on the finished track. Stu's version IMO is much more concise, focused and, well, funky. Each to their own though.

Don't like the album version at all; IMO the one weak point on a superb album. Can't stand the tone for a start; one of my least favourite tones ever. I vote for the Zender version every time but it's ultimately your call.

[quote name='Stu-khag' post='846567' date='May 24 2010, 03:16 PM']My old band always used to get compared to hawkwind. A lot! I'd never really heard them other than silver machine. So at the grand old age of 24 I heard Warrior on the edge of time for the first time with some mates. When Opa -Loka played and we heard the bass, everyone looked at me and said "that sounds like you playing". I played a gig at a little festival in an afro jazz kind of band and was playing just after Nik Turner, I like to tell people he supported us. Whenever I get asked to DJ at gigs, I always try to Opa Loka. I've never been to see Hawkwind live as people have told me not to bother as they aren't sounding too great live and rely too much on sequencers live. People's views on them differ so much that I don't want to take the risk and be disappointed.[/quote] Dave Brock played bass on "that bloody Opa-Loka thing". Lemmy told me. I love the track but Lem hates it!

[quote name='Stag' post='889733' date='Jul 8 2010, 06:08 PM']Same for me. I feel instantly at home with my '82 4001, but not so totally at home with a P or a J... mebbe cos ive been playing the same bass for 10 years...? Would advise you play one first though a few times as they can be a bit "Marmite" as previously mentioned. (on a second note, how odd that I own both kinds of bass being discussed in the same thread? dont think thats ever happened before!)[/quote] I think its quite possible that if you played 10 different Rics you'd have 10 different experiences.

As with most basses, you need to try a few yourself to find out how you interact with them. For instance I get on great with most Rics and don't get on very well with most Fenders; many find the opposite is the case. Bear in mind individual instruments differ too; I've played some Rics I really haven't liked at all, but my favourite of all the basses I've ever played is my '72 4001.

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='888832' date='Jul 7 2010, 07:12 PM']Fair enough. Good post. Good groove, bad groove...now there's a thread in the making. [/quote] No hard feelings and my comment wasn't meant to inflame; it was just me thinking aloud. I should maybe have chosen my words more carefully; its easy to read the worst into something. I then took offence at the "laughable" comment and shouldn't have done. As for that thread, I think I'll stay out of it this time!

Thanks Mike. Maybe I didn't express myself as clearly as I thought I had initially, but regardless, I hope I've got it across now. Anyway, enough about MM, back to the Janek/Hadrien show. BTW, is Matt Garrison definitely on at Bass day? There's nothing on the web page yet.

This is what I actually said : "[b]I don't find[/b] his groove that good at all. However I feel that I prefer players who push/drive/swing more than he does". I didn't say he couldn't groove. I also qualified my comment. I then further qualified my comment (yes, I'm repeating myself yet again) by saying I didn't personally like his feel. I'm not sure what it is about what I've said that is so difficult to grasp. It appears some people have taken offence at something they think I've said (that I didn't actually say) and have gone off on one. FWIW, I don't feel that "good groove" is an absolute. It is all a question of taste. It may be that there is a collective agreement about what constitutes good groove, in the same way that there can be about what constitutes good or bad anything, but that doesn't mean that absolutely everyone must share that opinion.

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='888099' date='Jul 7 2010, 09:01 AM']I appreciate people have their opinions and favourite players, but to say Marcus doesn't groove is like saying Pavarotti can't sing. Just because you don't like Opera, you still can't deny he is a great singer. If Marcus couldn't groove, do you think he'd be one of the world's most sought after session players? I just think some people on here think it's cool to admit not liking him.[/quote] I don't agree. Groove is about feeling and is a subjective issue. If I don't like his groove then my opinion is as valid as that of someone who loves his groove. If everyone else thinks he grooves great, fine, I have no problem with that. But my opinion still stands. FWIW I believe I actually qualified my initial comment by saying that I don't personally [i]like[/i] his groove. Am I not allowed to have that opinion either? As for "thinking it's cool to admit to not liking him", now that really [i]is[/i] laughable. Why can't you just accept that some people simply won't like his playing? I happily accept that there will be many people who don't like players that I like, because everyone has a different perspective on playing. That's one of the things that makes music so interesting. I don't not like Marcus because it's cool not to like Marcus (the thought never crossed my mind and is utterly ridiculous anyway; I would never have thought it was cool not to like Marcus. Why would that be cool? I would've thought if anything the opposite would be true). I simply don't like what he does or how he sounds. Get over it. I can't understand why people so often think their opinions are absolute truths rather than just that; opinions.

It seems I've hit a nerve. Sacred cow anyone?

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='887764' date='Jul 6 2010, 08:43 PM']It is impossible to think MM doesn't possess a great groove. Laughable.[/quote] Why is it laughable? Can't I feel/hear things differently than you? Do I have to like the same things? I thought I qualified my comment by saying I prefer guys who push more. I don't get on with Jazz Basses either. That's just me.