Misdee

I thought she was terrific on Later. For me, she's got real star quality. Like we've both said, there's a huge divergence of opinion on what's good and what's not. Nothing wrong with that.

Biff Byford!

It just shows how tastes can differ because I thought English Teacher were very dull. Contemporary alternative rock by numbers. There is nothing remotely new or original about their music or performance. For me, CMAT have stolen the show so far from what I have seen.

As Tolstoy contended in Anna Karenina, failure is much more interesting than success. I enjoy the bad acts far more than the competent ones. I've got a big TV, surround sound and I haven't flushed the toilet since lunchtime. It's the just like being there, but much cheaper.

All that is actually pretty true.

I thought some of the vocal harmonies sounded like they were using backing tapes, but I could be wrong. Band is tight, though.

Never mind principles, what about the music? I'm very poorly today and only have Glastonbury for company. In most instances, I hope these bands aren't getting paid much. They don't deserve to be rewarded. It will only encourage them in the deluded idea that they're important and the music is worthwhile. For the most part, they're not, it isn't. What I enjoy most is the discrepancy between the rhetoric of the BBC and the reality. They threaten you with "a spellbinding cultural commentary set to groundbreaking soundtrack of edgy intricate guitar pop" and, inevitably, what turns up is just another crap indie band largely indistinguishable from the last one.

There was a similar hoax recently about Black Sabbath reforming to do yet another farewell concert (supposedly this time they really meant it...allegedly), at Villa Park in July. I knew it couldn't be true because they already said their definitive goodbyes (again) in 2017 and sold tickets on that basis. Also, Ozzy probably can't get to the toilet unaided nowadays, let alone make it through a gig. Even if it was true I'm sure Age Concern would alert social services to such flagrant elder-abuse and it wouldn't be allowed to go ahead.

I think changing from the SD to the GZR would be a bit of a sideways move, and not the best use of money in terms of upgrading the overall bass playing experience. The GZR is a superb pickup, but the SD is just as good as the EMG, albeit with a slightly different flavour. My own personal experience has been that changing pickups can be a big upgrade if you have been using a pickup the is genuinely defective or obviously deficient in some way, but swapping one perfectly good high-end pickup for another because of notional sonic differences that you have read about is usually a disappointing waste of money. If someone is getting a custom Fodera I can understand exploring the nuances of choosing the exact right pickup, butI really don't think a Squire Classic Vibe bass warrants spending that amount of money to explore the subtleties of two high quality replacement pickups. If you've got a Seymour Duncan in there that's already a big upgrade. My advice would be experiment with strings and EQ and try and appreciate the character of the sound as it is.

I've got a very thick Morado(Pau Ferro) fingerboard on my Sadowsky Will Lee and it looks and sounds great. Apparently Roger Sadowsky is a big fan of that particular wood for fingerboards, describing it as sounding warmer than maple or ebony but tighter than rosewood. To me, the biggest difference I can hear between fingerboards is whether they are lacquered or not rather than between different woods, but I'm sure there must be something in it.

I remember when Pau Ferro was considered an exotic upgrade on woods like rosewood and maple. Spector NS2 basses used it for fingerboards back in their 1980's heyday, as did Sadowsky. It's only since rosewood had that funny turn where it became an endangered species that Pau Ferro has become more mainstream and thus invited suspicion that it might be an inferior wood. Bass Player Magazine used to contend that Pau Ferro was sonically halfway between rosewood and maple, if I remember correctly. I can believe that, because it's notably denser and harder than rosewood.

I'm sure the reasons for PMT's demise are complex, but I think one reason why some retailers are struggle is that they lose sight of the basics, i.e stocking products that people are keen to buy. If you've got goods that punters are enthusiastic about, that's more than half the battle. The stuff on the walls at these big retailers is tat at various price points. Needless to say, the bass stuff is usually even more depressing and threadbare than the guitars. The retailers have done "deals" with their suppliers, but in doing so throw the baby out with the bathwater because their stock ends up being not what potential customers are really after. Whether you're a retailer or a private individual selling from an advert on a forum like Basschat, if you've got something that people really want, someone will buy it. I've never had a problem selling a bass because I always buy really nice ones, regardless on whether they are expensive or more affordable models. If you have to convince people why they aught to want what you are selling then it's always going to be an uphill slog. Conversely, if you've got enticing goods to sell there will always be someone who comes forward with the money to buy them.

Contradictory as this may sound, if your bass sound isn't cutting through because it's sounds too compressed, are you using a compressor, and if so, which one and how is it set? I use a Diamond Bass Compressor and especially on Fender-style basses it really focuses the tone and makes it audible. The Diamond is a really useful tone shaping tool as well as a compressor. I've got the older 18 volt model, but the now version has a mid control as well as the shiftable frequency tilt added so it's probably even more useful. It's a really addictive sound.

Last I heard, the Sadowsky single coils are a custom wind done for them by Seymour Duncan, based on the Antiquity vintage-style pickup. FWIW, I wouldn't be too hasty replacing what you already have. In the early 2000's I had a Fender America Deluxe Jazz Bass and it sounded fine with the stock Noiseless pickups. There's loads of great choices if you do decide to replace the pickups, though.

What's for certain is that a decent passive Fender can sound as good as anything at any price. I prefer that raunchy Fender tone to most very expensive boutique basses.

This is a really good demonstration of the difference.

My Sadowsky's are both Will Lee signature models. The mid boost control is a nice feature , but even without it engaged the true single coil pickups fitted as standard on the WL have much more pronounced midrange than the hum cancelling pickups that come on the regular Sadowsky basses. It's a big difference in tone. The single coil pickups are much more raunchy. Much more Fender-like.

I totally agree that there's respective merits to traditional Fender-style style Jazz Basses and more modern active versions. I think a lot depends on how, or indeed if, you use the Sadowsky preamp. With a two band boost-only preamp there is a tendency for players to boost treble and bass, and the inevitable consequences is that it makes Sadowsky basses sound more recessed in the midrange. Nothing necessarily wrong with that, but as you quite rightly point out, it's not what you want in certain situations. I'm not a huge fan of that modern scooped-out, thump and sizzle Jazz Bass tone. Marcus Miller makes it sound great but it's tiresome that so many players just want to copy that tone. For years I shied away from active Jazz-style basses for exactly that reason. However, it's quite possible to EQ a Sadowsky so it sounds anything but scooped. Not least of all, those basses sound good either in passive mode or active but with no added boost or just a little bit. Or add some mids externally and boost the bass or treble (but not both) depending on whether you want to be deep or bright and bit more gritty. You can also attenuate with the VTC. There's lots of ways approach it. Also, being able to pan between the two pickups on a Sadowsky opens up a lot of tonal possibilities that can be harder to achieve on a conventional passive Jazz with two volume controls.

Well, if nothing else we've all learned something about how to play Hard To Handle.

At the risk of stating the obvious, the "right" way to play it would be the original version by Otis Redding. I've had a very quick listen to the original. It's in a different key for a start, and to play it the same way as Johnny Colt does you would have to tune down a semitone. To my ear Duck Dunn plays the part in question completely differently, with a root-five-octave figure replacing the bit with a low E. It's quite clear however, that he plays the contentious G# version, except it's a G because Otis' version is in B flat. To my sensibilities the bass part works better the "right" way because part of the musical effect of the song is how it moves between major and minor tonalities. I'm all in favour of making adjustments in the name of individual expression, but sometimes it's a question of judgement whether embellishments are to the detriment of what made the song what it was originally. In this case either approach will work, but I think the "right" way is the right choice because it sounds better.

Either will work over a dominant 7th, but the G# emphasises the major tonality. (Listen to me! Dominant 7th , major tonality? I've watched a few bass tutorials on YouTube, now I'm starting to believe my own publicity and getting ideas above my station😄. If I get myself a six string bass and a looper you have my permission to shoot me.)

Either will work over a dominant 7th, but the G# emphasises the major tonality.

Finally got to my bass tonight to have a crack at this. I can see how someone might assume it's an A, but G# is clearly right and sounds better to me. The verse is in a major key, and the turnaround bits use a minor third, but you can play a minor third over certain major chords, and vice versa. Otis Redding version is essentially the same.

It'd be interesting to compare how Johnny Colt plays it compared to Duck Dunn on Otis Redding's original version. Maybe( probably) Johnny isn't playing a faithful rendition.

This happens to me quite a lot, ie realising I've been playing something very slightly wrong whilst being totally confident I had it right. One note can put a whole different complexion on things.