Dood

[quote name='E sharp' post='1067055' date='Dec 22 2010, 06:36 PM']Spoke to Mark yesterday at around 1pm , and ordered a Great Gramma .....[/quote] Ahhh, I traded mine in recently for some other Bass Gear. Seemed like a good time to sell to be honest... Wait.... You're not talking about elderly relatives are you?

Please, guys - keep your own personal agendas in check and arguments off the forum - You're doing a great job of ruining what could have been a really helpful and informative thread for those pursuing a career in Bass Playing. Really disappointed in some of the rubbish on this thread. You all been stuck in doors for too long or something? Thank you to those who have made some good points.

That's an interesting question re: point 3. I have to say that if it were true, then would I be tuning 'upward' more and more over the life of the string? - I'm assuming that if the core does stretch it would be in the regions of hundreths of an inch vs anything that could be measured without test gear. Maybe it's a myth perpetuated by those who pull the bass out of tune by yanking the strings away from the neck. Which is more likely down to other problems rather than the string stretching throughout it's life?

Hey there - nothing wrong with your idea - I don't think you will need splitters, thru boxes or kill switches just yet! You might need to split the signal from your bass out to the two signal chains though. Can I suggest a way of making your complicated paths very simple? If you are familiar with the POD and are using one then - Grab yourself a Line6 X3 (live maybe) as an upgrade - you can run two separate signal paths (bass path and guitar path for example) and run them out to the two channels of your power amp and then drive the two separate halves of your 8x10. You can do all that you have described without other pedals and everything will be in one tidy box then. Less to carry and you don't have to worry about broken cables / leaving things behind / all the other trials and tribulations of gigging with multiple pedals

I've always liked Erik Satie's 'Gymnopodie No.1' as a piece of music that moves me. In the last week or so I've been delving more in to Satie's work and have found another piece that I didn't realise was by him too. This, Gnossienne No.1 just hits the spot - I don't know what it is.. the slight sense of despair or loneliness - but it is beautiful. I've heard a few versions by different musicians - some rush the piece and it doesn't sit with me as well, but this guy on YouTube has totally nailed it. Infact, hearing the many different interpretations of the piece (which in turn changes the whole mood of the music) has actually made me stop and take a look at my own playing too, noting the subtleties in Gnossienne No.1 and how it affects the listener - which has got to be a good thing. Ok, so here it is..

[quote name='krth1985' post='1064713' date='Dec 20 2010, 03:15 PM']In Loving Memory by Alter Bridge deserves a mention. Especially the version below, live in Amsterdam. When the crown sings back and you can clearly see Tremonti holding back tears, always gives my goosebumps. [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFQReV3_nuA&feature=fvst"]In Loving Memory[/url][/quote] Yes, a touching song - I have to +1 this track.

[quote name='civictiger' post='1063563' date='Dec 19 2010, 02:44 PM']ahh right, CC messages now make sence![/quote] Cool [quote name='civictiger' post='1063563' date='Dec 19 2010, 02:44 PM']well I wasnt actually using any MIDI device and getting latency.. I was using an on screen keyboard that is built in to one of my synths. I dont have any ASIO drivers, though.. so im gonna be getting them for now, which will help a lot lol.[/quote] Ahh doesn't matter, it's still the hardware (and driver's) ability to receive, process and output a sound. Again, what card are you using? - Yes I would very strongly advise using an ASIO/ASIO2 driver for it. IF the card you are using doesn't have a proprietry ASIO driver, then try ASIO4ALL - an open source project which covers most sound cards inclusing the 'EMU' processor types. [quote name='civictiger' post='1063563' date='Dec 19 2010, 02:44 PM']also, dood, obviously as im aiming for a band format, how will we make sure that all the synths for all the band members are in time? we cant all just press play individually, it would have to be solid.. I know there is a thing called a MIDI clock which acts like a click track that can keep synths in time together but I dont know how that would press play on the transport area in Cubase with the automation laid down.[/quote] Yes, the MIDI clock *isn't* the tempo track for songs etc - it simply synchronises devices. The way that you'd get all your devices to change at the same time is simple - you just need to make sure they are connected to your master sequencer and slave from it. The Sequencer can be configured and programmed so that each slave device receives on a seperate MIDI channel - this means that it will only accept messages designated for it - ie, channel 10 could be a drum machine, receiving the drum midi track from a sequencer. MIDI channel 5 could be the output of an automation track from the sequencer (or DAW) to control the MIDI enabled lighting rig. Really, you can go as in depth as you like! Going back to the likes of Guitar Rig etc - using a low latency soundcard, you could just plug your guitar straight in to a laptop and have the DAW software switch patches in time with your MIDI backing track. To answer your question, there are a number of ways of daisy chaining devices - the most obvious is to use MIDI IN / MIDI OUT / MIDI THRU connections - though you'd have to look in to seeing what the limitations of chaining multiple devices are, as I've never tested the theory with more than two or three connections.

If the right band came up (or an existing band doing very well) then I would quite happily move if need be - but hey, it'd *have* to be the right band and be worthwhile!

[quote name='civictiger' post='1062694' date='Dec 18 2010, 05:54 PM']However, Cubase is SO slow with my PC, it takes about a second from a midi keyboard for the osudn to come out, ...[/quote] That sounds more like a huge latency problem - either with your Cubase configuration OR with your soundcard / hardware not Cubase as a program. What are you using as your device to output the audio you hear (which is delayed?)

[quote name='civictiger' post='1062694' date='Dec 18 2010, 05:54 PM']At the moment I am using a VST host called Cantabile, for experimenting with what I need to do. I do have Cubase. However, Cubase is SO slow with my PC, it takes about a second from a midi keyboard for the osudn to come out, where as Cantabile is instant.. because it is used just as a VST host (dedicated) so it doesnt need any other processes going on or any need to do anything else. Cubase coming to think of it though would be much more suitable, especially since we can use automation.. I think we would be turing the pedals on/off through automation (or even just the volumes if that) and then use pitch bending and filters with automation.. Contabile is great I just think Cubase would be better for this reason.. I just have no idea where to start with it compared to Contabile! Also, Dood, you mentioned CC messages, what do you mean by these? are they just midi signals that trigger stuff? but obviously cant be heard.[/quote] I dropped Cubase and went with Reaper instead, because it is a much 'lighter' program AND you can run the whole DAW from a USB stick!! - which is great for those on the move! Cubase just did my head in - I'd spend all the time I should have been getting good ideas down, trying to get the DAW configured.. Where as Reaper is great for getting great results, fast. Yes, CC messages are 'control messages', for example the changing of the volume in real time of an effect. Or indeed the switching on and off of a single effect with a patch. When you push the modulation wheel back and forth on a MIDI keyboard, it is changing the CC value between 0-128 depending on the wheel's position. This movement is interpreted by the device which is assigned to that controller, which then can adjust a parameter or parameters on that device.

Different brands of strings will also greatly change the feel of the B string. Some have a higher tension by design and can help to give a tighter sound. I'd certainly recommend a higher gauge and for me a brighter toned string too, especially if you have a 34" scale vs 35, 36 etc

I do agree that most 'virtual' performance issues are down to poor implementation and any sandboxing 'pre roll-out' is a very good idea. If I had a pound for ever project I had handed to me with a poor design implementation... doh! Thing is - and something I would need to test for myself - is how VSTs perform between VM machines. For example if a software VST Host residing on one VM Machine 'communicated' with a DAW on another, how they would behave. Infact, if both the VST Host and DAW were residing on the same VM Machine, how they behave in comparison to running directly on normal hardware. I've certainly have used products that the manufacturers suggested NOT running in a VM environment due to a performance hit. I would like to know how VMware is geared to handle multimedia processing - again, I think most of it will be down to the performance of the hardware host - and I think that this will then be outside of financial viability for most users. If I had a really powerful machine to run VMWare environments on it - the chances are, it's already capable of running VSTs without a problem and thus negates the need to sandbox. Much like the projects I had worked on, most of the design problems were down to not having intimate knowledge of the environment that the product was to reside on - and maybe this is a problem too for those with performance issues in using VSTs? (e.g using hacked software - 32 Vs 64bit / memory allocation, multi threading etc etc etc) I'm about to go cross-eyed thinking about this now.. time for a cuppa!

Hmmm, well the main problem is that running virtual machines in VMWARE is that the VM Host requires resources of it's own to run - the host alone requires more resources (ie Memory) than most VSTs - so I think you're gains in performance will be made negligible by the requirements of the VM Host and whatever OS is running within it. Especially if you start running mulitple VMs on one host. I would expect for flawless performance it'd be worth investing in a seriously powerful server host. (which is fine if you have deep pockets) - I can't see too many bands taking racks of hosts to gigs with them either to be honest. On the flipside though, you could keep backup copies of the VMs on another host, so that if one goes down the backup could be brought online with minimal fuss. I'm used to running multiple ESX hosts with a minimum of 8 processors and 64Gb RAM and tons of disc space in huge corporate environments so I'm familiar with performance issues within VMs.

[quote name='civictiger' post='1061295' date='Dec 17 2010, 08:39 AM']Thanks dood, that was an interesting reply! So I'm presuming, that an external click track would inout into the unit and send midi signals to trigger events, if I'm correct in saying this? As for the muse receptor, pendulum use this. Infact, they have 7 of them on at all times live (one each+vocals).. Would this trigger the vst changes internally or would it again need an external device to do such thing? The only problem tho is its price, I would need a cheaper, software version of this for now atleast! The program I have on trial atm can load as many vst's as I want, and in diffrrent racks, and have set-lists too for different songs which is all useful, and I can trigger it to goto the 'next' or previous patch in a click, which I could trigger.. The main pronblem I have with this is it just isn't hands free, or foot free.. And in some parts of our songs we need a vst to turn on for 2 bars and back off again for a while (for overdubs) which would be unreliable for me to do myself.. Do you know if this could be sequenced like you mentioned? And do you know how?[/quote] Hi! I think in most cases including the receptor, you will need an external sequencer of some sort to trigger patch changes or control CC messages to the host. Ok, so what program are you using at the moment? As long as your program can receive and can be controlled by MIDI implementation, then yes you can either control it via a sequencer or possible via a external MIDI controller like a footboard. It depends on the level of implementation that your software contains - but as an example, I have some free looping software that I can controll just by using a USB>MIDI interface and plugging in my Roland FC200 straight in to my laptop. As for sequencers, most DAW software is capable of outputting MIDI data along with audio and say, a click track. I use REAPER and think it is brilliant. But other DAWs such as cubase could also present an external device with patch change messages and CC updates etc etc. I have seen bands go out on tour with just a PC or Mac running sequencing / Virtual Instrument support AND backing tracks.. however, when it goes down... you're stuffed unless you have a back up! Do I know how? Well yes and no - I know the basics, but it would take a lil bit of playing to figure it out totally. It's not actually that difficult, but takes time to get your tempo track together for the song with all the messages in the right place at the right time. You could liken it to sequencing a drum track in a DAW. You have the individual notes, but the CC messages also control velocity, effects, pitch bend, after touch etc etc etc. Those same CC messages can be sent externally to control say, effect delay time in a VST, WAH pedal control and as you have mentioned, turn individual pedals on and off.

I'm just a bit surprised that elsewhere on the forum there is so much support for our fellow bass players, yet ads like these seem to get a bit of friction. Did I miss something? I think that the more support and useful responses we can put on these posts, then the greater likelihood that we will continue to get pro' acts looking for bass players. As a pro myself, if adverts are dropped on my doorstep instead of having to go look for them then it's a good thing no? So let's all be a bit more constructive eh? Bass players might get a bad name otherwise!

Yup a graphic equaliser rack or channel strip with EQ on it will work fine. There are loads out there on the market - I would certain recommed a rack unit designed to go in the effects loop verses a 'pedal' that is usually better off being connected before the input of the amplifier itself. (ie, in the signal path from the guitar).

Bands using this method will be running some sort of sequencer, be it actually a DAW or similar that syncs to a click track (for the musicians to play along in time with) - most DAW software can output the necessary MIDI channel / CC controller information to external devices at a given point in the track - for example, I could use it to change patches on my GMajor 2 at any given moment in a song - maybe even adjust my wah pedal for me - I've also heard of bands using a sequencer to load and run lighting programs as well for shows, so that everything runs perfectly in time! As for a hardware VST host - I trying to remember the name of two such pieces of hardware. Jordan Rudess used to use a big 2u rack unit that could load many VSTs all at the same time. Sadly, for the average musician, it was very expensive. The other unit I recall was far cheaper, but maybe didn't have the MIDI message controls on it that would make it useful in this situation. [edit] Ahhh wait, found it! - It's Receptor, by MUSE - found this old review [url="http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_muse_research_receptor/"]http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_muse_research_receptor/[/url] hopefully the hardware is still available!

[quote name='dincz' post='1059913' date='Dec 15 2010, 07:23 PM']Oops, I must have dozed off for the past 15 years OK, foot now out of mouth.[/quote] Nawwww!! It's alreet! *pats dincz on the back* don'cha worry about it! I remember when all this 'ere were just fields *Dvorák's "New World" Symphony playing in the background*

I love the Korg Pitchblack tuner. It's small, built like a proverbial outhouse and very acurate. It even tunes my low F# strings - something I've seen lots of tuners struggle with. As for effects, maybe you could link us to some YT videos that you like the sounds of and we'll have a go at telling you how to go about getting those tones if you are unsure.

Just gotten Guitar Pro 6. A HUGE improvement over Guitar Pro 5. I highly recommend upgrading. You can download a demo of 6 to see it in action. [url="http://www.guitar-pro.com/en/index.php"]http://www.guitar-pro.com/en/index.php[/url]

[quote name='4-string-thing' post='1059864' date='Dec 15 2010, 06:49 PM']The problem is, our guitarists both have 200w Blackstar valve heads and no concept of turning it down! Keep the suggestions coming though chaps![/quote] Hmmm... ditch the guitarists. Is it any wonder us bass players have so many back problems having to lug around twice as much gear as our guitar counterparts just to be heard, because they are a. Selfish b. Stupid C. Incapable of compromise. Any guitarist worth his weight in **** understands the importance of calving out his space in the spectrums of frequency AND amplitude.

[quote name='dincz' post='1059826' date='Dec 15 2010, 06:21 PM']Any 2 channel power amp is bridgeable with the addition of some very basic electronics. A competent tech should be able to add the necessary phase inverter for next to nothing. There's a kit here for ₤8.25: [url="http://www.jaycar.co.uk/productView.asp?ID=KC5469&keywords=KC5469&form=KEYWORD"]http://www.jaycar.co.uk/productView.asp?ID...mp;form=KEYWORD[/url][/quote] Not necessarily, for example D Class and H Class amplifiers. There are some whose individual channels are bridged already too, but I haven't seen any new versions of those for a while. Maybe not cost effective!