Al Krow

Does beg the question, which 8?

@bubinga5 thanks for sharing that clip. Loved it - wonderful groove.

Haha - well done to those Californians for their amazing language skills. I wonder what else he had done for his "custom job" or if it was only a lick of paint?

@Tuco you're a better person than many I know to be able to share your story above. Ok, so you were a little late in posting a pedal I'd bought off you but, given what you were going through, no big deal at all! It was not hard for me to cut you some slack back then, when I first got wind from you and confirmed by your BL what was going on - as my missus is a mental health professional in the NHS and she spends her days turning around broken lives. You have some really great band mates and I'm truly delighted you have turned the corner. As far as I am concerned, it's a privilege that our paths have crossed and you are immensely welcome back!

It's not a piece of gear like a Wal bass, that is going to increase in value the longer you hold on to it, so if you don't think you're going to be getting much use out of it, my vote would be for you to cut your losses and move on.

Noooooooo....a "FULL fat Trav" has now been defined as being = 4 Yammy BB's mate. Just because you're currently not as much of a heavyweight (temporarily) as you used to be (partly due to selling basses and partly due to drinking less beer) doesn't mean you can chop and change internationally agreed BB standards that have been universally adopted a while back. What you're simply saying is that you Trav (the BB guru) are on the way to owning just 50% of a "FULL fat Trav" (complement of basses). You can't just decide a 5' 10" is actually 5' 9" 'cos you've shrunk a bit in later life. That won't do at all!

Welcome to BC Burt! Like you, I'm a massive fan of portability, which is not least driven by the fact that, despite being the oldest member of a couple of my bands, I still seem to have been lumbered with the most gear to take to gigs! A few Qs if I may, to point us in the right direction: Do you have a budget cap in mind? And are you happy getting good condition used gear, as well as new? Are you settled on getting a combo rather than lightweight separates? What's your typical band line up (e.g. loud drummer?) and how much is going through back line vs the PA?

Ok that's really interesting in terms of those two basses having a similar tone. Very much what I was guessing a few posts back, but you've gone multiple steps better than guess-work, having owned both models! Well, for me at least, that's a good reason to stick with my BB 1025, particularly as I had such a great experience with it in a band mix the other night, and not to be too tempted by the (one-string-missing and wrong colour 😁) BB 3000 currently up for sale. With you ruling out the BB 3000 (vs the BB 1024/5) and Andy the TRB5PII (vs the BB NE2) yesterday, it certainly looks like my complement of four Yammys (aka "a full fat Trav") is not likely to be seeing an extended waistline in the too near future...

Hey T - given that we've got your attention, how about posting a wee recording of the Chunk with and without a Brown Dog for us?

👍 excellent, that's really good to hear and another vote of confidence for Alto. Gonna be tricky to do that "prior to anything else" given what the cat dragged in a couple of hours ago...😀

Certainly on the Allen and Heath they are pretty good and certainly in terms of reverb are completely fine. I've just upgraded our A&H Zed 10FX to the A&H Zed60 14FX to take us from 4 + 2 stereo inputs to 8 + 2 stereo inputs for my main function band. But feeling that's going to be overkill for the new project which really just needs 3 (possibly 4) inputs altogether. I think from what you're saying I may be hard pressed to get anything much better than the Alesis for the size.

Sounds good...BUT IEMs are not on the agenda for us for now. As the Russian mafia boss said to his wife when she asked for a divorce, we ain't looking to spend that amount of money just yet! 😂

Remember I'm only interested in the FX versions: Alesis Dimensions: 7 3/4" L x 6" W x 2"H (= 200mm x 150mm x 50mm) (from their website) Beheringer 1202FX: 220mm x 242mm x 47mm On a surface area basis (given they are pretty much the same height) the Behringer is actually 77% bigger (i.e. almost double if we are dealing with round numbers). If that is 'man measurements' then so be it 😂

That's a good shout, but the Behringher 1202FX is almost double the size of the Alesis, at which point I'd probably think "blow it - let's just take the A&H Zed14FX". I'm kinda hoping there maybe something Alesis sized, with FX, but a touch more capable...

Well it seems I have these two adaptors to hand which between them should hopefully mean I can make use of the two stereo inputs to create a single 3rd input. We can revert to the larger Allen & Heath Zed 14FX if we find ourselves needing any more. So maybe 3 usable inputs, rather than 4, and no xlr outputs. But hey I can't expect the earth for £75 to £80!!! Before I bite the bullet, if anyone has any other recommendations for a compact mixer with FX, then I'd be keen to get your thoughts. The Allen & Heath Zed 6FX did look good, but it's also got the same "stereo" input which effectively means that it's a 4 input not a 6 input mixer and its starting to creep up in price and size at which point we may as well our Zed 14FX

Fair point, but I guess we can get around the line input issue by using a simple passive DI box? (I've got one already which avoids any additional cost). Which still leaves the mono / stereo Q: my hesitation is that many similar inputs are marked "L (mono)", but this clearly isn't.

Guys - recently came across this little mixer, which seems ideal for one of my bands which is just a four piece with one vocals and one BV; particularly as it has FX and allows a bit of reverb to be included, which is a bit of a 'must have' where vocalists are concerned in my experience and it also costs around just £75. Only (slightly numpty!) Q on this is to do with Line 3/4 which is a "stereo-paired" channel. Not clear in my head what that means in practice i.e. if we use just one acoustic guitar input into the Line 3 i.e. the L channel will that just output through the left speaker only or will it output through both speakers provided I have the pan set half way between left and right?

Yeh @Bo0tsy who has more filter pedals in his collection than anyone else I know (we're talking 20 or so?!) has often effused about how good that one is! It's a BIG pedal board consuming beast though...

Been waiting to get my hands on one of these for a little while...it's actually more compact than I had thought it would be, which is a bonus. Looking forward to A/B'ing it against the Fwonk and MXR BEF over the weekend. Those of you who have or had one - is your preference to have it band pass or low pass mode? This one has been set up with it internal switches set to low pass (vs band pass), res + (vs res - ) and buffered bypass (vs true bypass). Actually those would have been my preferences for each setting also, so it seems me and the previous owner (a dodgy bass player from this parish) are thinking along the same lines

Yeah for sure, don't disagree. Hence my comments earlier about blind testing a BB 3000 and a BB 1024. But I think Andy set out the reasons why, other than the fact that some of us (me definitely included!) find that they look awesome, in his comments on "better" very well, a few posts ago. And I'm guessing there's a reason that the BB 1200/S and BB 3000 and 5000 basses (all neck through) are held in such high esteem? I suspect it's more than just nostalgia.

No not all songs in a 2 hour set are identical in the way that they are played by either the band or me the bass player. There will be variation in guitar pedals and sound, whether rhythm guitar is brought in, whether the song is stripped back, Motown vs Rock etc etc. Sometimes it's just great on bass to just 'sit back in the mix'; other times you want / need to be more punchy in order to not be 'lost in the mix'. Earlier in the thread a few pages back John, who is another covers/ function band bassist, mentioned using his 735A mostly in passive, but switching to active 3/4 J setting when required. I'm guessing for exactly the same reasons.

Hidden in your post is actually something very helpful to me as someone who has come pretty close to getting a TRB5Pii on a couple of occasions. And then held back because what I'm really after is a P/J version of the NE2 or alternatively a neck through version of the the 735A. It's really useful to have confirmed that these two high end basses are pretty similar and says to me that I did the right thing in not going for both - so thanks for that!

Interesting discussion topic about what constitutes "better" that you've raised Andy. Can't disagree that it is ultimately subjective, although we collectively can much more easily spot when something is genuinely crap (and that's a long way from what Yammy BB's are!). You said you thought I prefer active basses. Actually that's not entirely accurate. I do love my BB NE2, for sure, which is purely active. It is such a great sounding bass (you managed to get your hands on one yet, Andy?) But my post earlier today about playing my BB 1025 (which is purely passive) confirms that I think that's also a bloody brilliant bass. My 735A I will play both passively than actively. On the other hand my Ibbys I will play almost entirely actively. So I think the more accurate answer is I like both, it will depend on the bass and the preamp, and also whether in a particular setting I need to cut through a bit more on particular numbers, in which case having active EQ on tap can be just the ticket. @krispn has just made some very good points, much more articulately than the response I'd started drafting!