Woodinblack

I think someone (maybe @Happy Jack) had one of those straps that has a part that goes over both shoulders.

No it isnt. With an active preamp you have a buffer to your signal and don't lose your high frequencies in the cable, or allow noise to be injected. You can also have more tone control if you want, but that is a secondary reason. Some people prefer the sound of their bass with the top rolled off, which is why a lot of wireless sending units have a 'cable tone' option, which gives you back that sound. But yes, as you say it is a preference.

I mod things that I have a problem with, but generally won't mod until there is a problem. I have different tuners on my main ibanez as it was headstock heavy so I put ultralites on it - It was my main gigging bass for a long time, probably still up there. I have done a few wiring changes as it is easy to do and makes a big difference, and a few preamp changes where there was an issue with the original pre-amp (which is normally a fault).

If you have already made the input active, either by the preamp or by a dual wireless sender, then yes, a passive mixer is fine, although if you are just mixing it on the board you have gained nothing from sending a stereo from the bass, If you have it still passive in the bass then you have just doubled the injected noise. And the behringer MX400 I think is a line level mixer, rather than an instrument level mixer.

Isn't that double neck in the Steve Hacket video Nicks Beggs Mason doubleneck, or do they both have an identical one?

Absolutely played it on Xanadu, while also playig the footpedals for bass

Might do - I have one, I have never tried it! No reason not to do that - that is how rickenbacker stereos are wired (except they have volume and tone)

I had the double neck ibanez (the EDS1275 copy, but bolt on), loved that thing, had to sell it when I had no money. Would still like another one but prices are crazy now. However, one day maybe I will get a 2404 guitar / bass double neck. I think if I do I would modify it to have a stereo output with the guitar on one channel and the bass on another. And move the switch that switches between the neck as that was always in a bad position. Or maybe just something from aliexpress!

Trust me, it doesn't look like my dad made it - one of the necks would be pointing upwards! But yes, their second bass, made for rick wakemans bass player, but owned by rick wakeman then given to chris squire when he went back to yes. I guess they hadn't got their headstock sorted out then

The second bass made by Wal!

Thats the point - once you have already amplified your sources, passive blend is all you need. The problem with a passive blend in a passive system is that it allows for the interaction of the source coils, but that is already taken out by both sides being already buffered. Joining the two signals together gives you a combination of those systems without those systems affecting each other. Its like the first time I heard a roland guitar synth (back in 1980), i was blown away by the normal distortion circuit, and that was because although there wasn't anything clever in it, taking the individual sting signals, amplifying, distorting and then putting them together was so much smoother than just distorting the whole thing.

Well, now it is getting a bit of a pain. I can't really see a way for someone with my skills to put that power supply on my pedaltrain, so maybe the best option is to get a spaceship, but the pedaltrain 2 is half way between the HB 60 and 60XL, and I don't want to lose space, so I guess the XL makes more sense. but the spaceship power 60xl is 9-12weeks, wheras the 60xl + 60xl power is 4 weeks, and only £7 more, no brainer, plus adjustable feet. But then the one with a hardcase is only £30 more, which is more but its a pain gettingg hardcases for things. It all starts adding up!

depends - for a Spector etc, yes

What that needs is more knobs

Get an ibanez ashula for that. All the strings on the same neck!

Actually, very few active basses do this which is a shame as I think it is a valid thing to do. Most tend to go from the pickups to the balance control, then into the volume, then into the preamp, which always seemed a bit backwards, but it makes it easier for people who want to be able to switch to passive. so mixed, volumed and amplified. This is I think why basses with EMGs sound different, because they don't do that, they are amplified, mixed then volumed, which makes a lot more sense, because the amp is in the pickup. Also the reason that Wals and some ACGs sound different, each string is amplified then mixed. The difference is in an active bass, the two pickups intefere with each other, most noticable on a jazz, where you have two identical pickups that at the point where both volumes are full, there is a dip, due to two coils interacting with each other, not two sources. if they were amplified first, the two actual sound sources would interact, but not the coils. Also you should amplify before volume, that way your signal to noise stays the same at all volumes, rather than your signal going down and the noise staying up

Haha - don't notice anything when there is a picture! Must admit as much as I would love a double neck, I think fretted // fretless probably isn't enough of a difference for the extra weight - I would just play the fretless in a fretted way! would have to be a guitar / bass.

I think it is more than that. When you think about it, it wouldn't have had that octave thing to start with and it would have been put in to cut down on another problem, you haven't heard what impact that other problem has - maybe it is terrible? It is surprisingly difficult to work out an octave on a pitch to note system, many times the octave up is more prominant than the fundamental, certainly after the initial decay, you only need to listen to an old octave pedal to hear this, where it is jumping around. If you look at the midi output of something like a GR guitar synth, you can see how difficult this is (the midi output is quite poor compared to the internal pitch - it starts on one note then immediately bends to the correct note).

What is the point of a doubleneck bass / bass? Or is that bottom neck a lined fretless?

Wonder if it might not have the tinyest of headdives on that one!

That looks like the one on reverb, the one with the fuzz circuit

agedhorse doesn't seem to be the one trolling here...

22 total Gibson double necks with a bass neck. One on reverb for £43k

There are quite a few pictures of elves playing the bass and apparently that was his favourite. However there aren't many of the eds 1250s about now