three

Lovely video - thanks! I went through an extended period of experimenting with Fender-type basses and owned a few Celinders (some of which Andy above probably played - and with far greater skill than me). All were superb, though some have their idiosyncracies. Beyond tone, one of the remarkable aspects of Christian’s bases is their ergonomics. I don’t know how he did it (does it?) but the basses I owned had a kind of ‘wrap around’ feel and were immensely comfortable to play. I have a feeling that I owned the jazz in the video - I’ll drop a pm

Tasteful and classy - a sympathetic complement to the bass

I've not yet had the pleasure but need to seek out an Acinonyx - I read nothing but very good things!

I'm sure that there will be many different perspectives here. For context, I learned to play on a borrowed late '60s Mustang many decades ago, then played long-scales exclusively for three decades, moved to a combination of short and long-scales about 15 years ago, and have gradually drifted to short-scale almost exclusively. Age, reach and back pain have influenced the decision. Whilst short-scale basses can be heavy (I have two very heavy shorties), overall I they tend to be a lighter. On the questions: 1. In my case, a very long time indeed. However, I played both for an extended period (and still use a couple of headless 34" scale basses). I didn't really notice the transition or any problems. With fairly regular use, I wouldn't have thought that the shift would take longer than a couple of weeks (though it depends on the individual, of course, and possibly the bass?) 2. There is a vast range of shorties available - more seem to pop-up every month. Some of the more vintage shapes do seem to feature a bit of compression in the body - the shorter top horn can affect balance. However, many designs balance beautifully in my experience. I have a Wilcock and that is possibly to most beautifully balanced bass I've played - it's genuinely remarkable. The same is true with Spector shorties (the balance is much better than long-scale Spectors for me). So, it's worth shopping around and consideration of where the strap pin sits with respect to the 12th fret - a massive generalisation but a useful rule of thumb. It's also worth thinking about the placement of the bridge (back-end of the body?) 3. You also mention tone/sound - there's a perception that short-scales tend to be a bit thumpy/dull. I think this it true of some models, but others are very different and some can be extremely bright and pokey. I have a Spector that is capable of sounding very bright and alive. Alembics are weird full stop, and the shorties, whilst they are capable of the characteristic piano tone, sound more like an upright than a grand piano to me. That said, an enormous range of tones is possible with the filter electronics. The small-bodied shorties are a nightmare on a strap - again, bridge and strap pin placement. So in sum, probably worth taking a really good look around and trying a wide range of shorties - the variety in balance, tone, weight etc. is enormous, and I'm sure that there's something in the mix to which you could adapt fairly readily

DR High Beams or Jim Dunlop Nickels might work - both available in short 45-105. If you're feeling flush, you could try TI Rounds - fairly light and very compliant but sound more like flats than rounds to me. I've just removed a set as they weren't sufficiently bright for my needs. I can appreciate the view on Newtone - I use very light SS hexagonal core shorts (30-90) and they're very bright, though that's what I was looking for

The SCs are gorgeous basses in my opinion - less complicated in terms of operation and on-the-fly adjustment, but playability (when they're well set-up) is sublime. This is a little closer (in a storage unit!)

The heady perfume of exotic wood shavings. I miss these - currently out of reach. Certainly not to everybody's taste but to me, Alembic build a lovely instrument

I’ve just gone down from 40-95 to 30-90 on shorties (and two of the last long scales) with an extremely low action. Unusual I know, but I play with a very light touch (and my usual comedy technique)

That bass sort of rings a bell. It looks like the bass player on the original track was Larry Klein but I'm pretty sure that's not him on the TOTP appearance. I'll be interested to know if somebody can identify the instrument - from what I can see, I like the look of it

@funkle Thanks very much indeed for an extremely enjoyable thread - it's great to see somebody with a refined vision and the energy, persistence and ingenuity to follow it through. In this case, the vision was followed-through to a very positive conclusion in my view. The Wal mystique/mytery has been well and truly nailed from what I can hear. Indeed, the comparisons are excellent and the Walish sounds more Wal than the Wal. I know that sounds ridiculous, but to me, the Walish sounds slightly thicker and sweeter than the Wal in some modes, and it's that thickness and sweetness that I find most attractive about the Wal electronics/overall recipe. This sort of makes it more possible to achieve Wal-like tones without the compromises (to me) of having a Wal bass - I've had a few, and those compromises undermined the tonal goal. My aim/daydream now is to try this with a short-scale bass. Of course, a big compromise in itself and a short-scale is unlikely to sound exactly like a Wal, though I hope to be able to get close. Thank you again, a tour de force

I'd be very interested to see what Martin (Gallery) says and can do to help here. I have a very similar problem with a fretless four, though it's the E string, and to a lesser degree, the G string that are problematic. Dead spots from B to E/F on the G, but the E is just generally lacking sustain. A plucked open E dies much more quickly than A/D/G and it feels like there's something absorbing or countering the energy in the string (there's a peculiar sort of counter vibration that I can feel in the neck). I suspect it's a truss-rod issue (or a loose components somewhere) so probably off to a good tech in the next week or two - I'll update when I know more, and good to hear the Gallery's opinion on the MM

Excellent news - it’ll take a bit of time to adjust I’d imagine but it sounds like a good decision. I use a 7050 mainly for infill - my near fields roll-off around 60Hz. The only frustration for me with the Genelec was the link-through 85Hz cross-over that can’t be defeated - otherwise a classy sub and I’m sure the 7040 is the same. I just run full signal to the near fields and run the subs from around 75 down. I hope it works out for you

Thanks, I'd made assumptions that I shouldn't have made!

I’d no idea re: Wal and the Hellborg power amp. Fascinating and I wonder if it remains in place? I’ve had quite a few of these amps and still have one. Massively heavy and according to a well known studio tech, the most over-built power amp he’d seen. That said, they are not at all a transparent amp - there’s a gritty baked-in tone that surprised me initially, to the extent that I thought it was a fault. Four or five units later, it’s evident that the grit is designed-in. I wonder whether this has any influence on the calibration of contemporary Wal electronics? Back on topic, i’ve watched in awe at the stratospheric price increases. I’ve owned a few Wals and played a lot (I’m a fan of the tone and the v profile, especially on the earlier basses) but found them a little uncomfortable, and in some respects a bit agricultural. The prices in the ‘90s - relative to other basses - seemed about right to me

Intriguing! I didn’t know Status had produced a 33” scale SeriesII. Does the bass have a bendwell (probably not, I think the latter takes the scale down to 32” - it did on my Streamlines… I think)?

22 frets on a 30.5" (actually 30 and 3/8" on a Spector Shorty) scale is my preferred configuration, though 24 frets on 30.75" works very well too