Woodinblack

Well, me. I signed up back in 2013 when life membership was pretty cheap, did a few lessons, got bored carried on with other things. So much so that when I go it tells me that it looks like I am new here! Probably been there less than 50 times in 6 years. This course is the stuff that you just don't choose to do yourself because.. well, why would you. But when it is in one course on its own that you paid for, it makes sense to do it. That is why I did it. And I believe I have learned stuff on this course as well as it has pushed me into really listening to what I am doing. Some of the lessons are - my god, why would anyone need to be told that, and some are wow, thats good - One thing I am not is consistant, I can do some quite advanced stuff while falling down on some real basics.

I have found several lessons were a bit blank, where either it was something I already did fine or it didn't mean much to me, but some really helped. Like this weeks one

Wouldn't have much of a forum

Certainly didn't get that far. Disappointing but I guess she will have orders of magnitude more followers and views than people who could actually play something.

Well, I like the charcoal burst - I have a red burst that looks the same finish as that, but obviously redder (and with more strings and fewer pickguards)

Well, I never knew I sung the Meryl part!

iPad stand a couple of months ago, and my microphone stand at last weeks practice. Luckily someone found that so I can pick it up. Annoyed about the iPad stand thought

I guess blue is safer than green!

Like my ibanez you mean?

I assumed that was just some bloke who was holding it at the time of the photo, maybe he wasn't playing - who knows.

3 transformers? Oh yes, I remember you getting upset about that. Aren't two of them for an isolator though, so they will be tiny. If you have a problem with those, avoid valve amps, their transformers are pretty huge (in fact, also avoid radios, they have 10s of transformers and chokes in there). I am not really worried how it is made, more concerned with the sound. I think it didn't initialy sound as good as the CTM, but the controllability was much better - like the CTM-100, I have no idea what the controls on the front are supposed to do, you turn them and things subtly change, but not in any way that I could predict before hand! This was going into an ashdown 4x10, didn't hear it with another.

We only do it at the beginning - it is an important part, it tells the audience what the song is.

I have played one, but not for long and only in PMT. Sounds ok, but was just comparing it to the CTM-300 that was there.

I would agree. Mine runs through 2 x 1x12's. When I had a 4x10 (which I got rid of for the 2x112s) I would say it had more of a punch to it, but also a more 'fed up trying to get it in the car/out of the car/through people in pubs that wouldn't move.

I wouldn't be keen on doing it without something there. As I said, I don't really like the guitar slide, but it is something.

I like the finish on that. Don't know if it would sway me to getting a stingray but it would certainly have me looking twice

I don't think you read what I said. My CTM 100 at low levels, ie, not above talking volume is great - it is my goto practicing bass rig in my room, even late at night when I have it very quiet. A valve amp only needs to be pushed if you want to distort the power amp section, if you don't need to do that, it is fine from silent to loud.

I have a CTM100 and yes, it is loud enough but only just. I was looking at the full meter on fridays gig as it was at eye level and it was happily bouncing past the 40w section. the irony is, playing it at home is great, it is controllable and sounds nice quiet too

Well, that is a thing when people say that punk encouraged them to pick up an instrument and play. What bit of it? Some of the punk stuff could be done by people with absolutely no musical talent, some was every bit as hard as some of the prog around at the time, so it is hard to know what people mean when they were talking about punk in that context. Also read quite a good paper on the revisionist history of musical genres, noting that at no point in the areas that were known as the time of a specific genres (punk, metal, disco, rock'n'roll etc) did the average chart exceed 25% of that genre. Borne out if you look at top albums of 77 - Queen, abba, Slim Whitman, Shadows, Sinatra, The Beatles, The muppets, Johnny Mathis, Yes, Connie Francis, Elvis Presley, Diana Ross, Cliff Richard, Sex Pistols, Bread, a compilation disco album and a OST for star is born. Frankly, no year can claim to be innovative when it had a Johnny Mathis album in the charts!

No - they mentioned it in some video they did. Trying to get everything in the box with all the valves laying down and the transformers meant that 30w was the highest they could push it.

Did it really? Why didn't they have that freedom before? How did punk turn up if people didn't have that freedom. Wouldn't it be fair to say (from say Blues posts) the beatles did that, or any of those groups? Anyway, the program I refered to before was called The secret science of Pop - https://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/blog/2017-02-secret-science-of-pop Doesn't seem to be on iPlayer any more but probably some bits on youtube. There is also a bit on youtube about the millenium whoop (shudder), and how music is picked by analysis rather than by people listening to new music. All very interesting

I think that was just the movie 'breaking glass' I didn't say they were - they were just sub-genres. Does Technical death or post metal mean anything to 99% of people around? I don't know if they are genres or not, or something you made up for a point, but they are just sub-labels to describe a couple of groups so that people so focused on a fraction of a scene can group things together ok, so it has a huge impact on music that most people don't even know. I'll give you that

If I was home only and recording I would get helix native. Failing that a helix LT. Or if I had less money I would be happy with a B3(n).

The majority of people? Why would the majority of people want to learn a fringe language like English with only 340M natives speakers vs Mandarins 840M natives?

I am not sure that highlights enduring impact to point at sub genres of sub genres, which by their nature had less impact than the original. I am not saying it didn't have an impact to people, I mean to music in general. Obviously as I am in my 50s it had a big impact to me, it was my childhood, but whether it makes much difference to the world, who knows.