skankdelvar

[quote name='Booooooom' timestamp='1337541750' post='1661705'] Be great if they did though and its always good to dream![/quote] Indeed. Here's one off youtube that I hadn't seen before. The Feelgoods perform for the bemused inhabitants of a small French town. [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0Q9Zc7nZjw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0Q9Zc7nZjw[/url]

[quote name='BRANCINI' timestamp='1337533771' post='1661531'] There aint a right and wrong way though is there ? [/quote] You're right. As that dadadadadadadada bit over the D seems to stand out the most, maybe chuck it in for a hybrid version. And Sparko [i]is[/i] very under-rated. Gone back to doing roofing or something, such a shame. Does anyone share my mad dream that Wilko might one day hire Sparko and The Figure for a re-union tour. Give Norm a chance for a kip and some vitamins...

I've just been and had a look on youtube. Sparko seems to play most of the song up around the tenth - almost like he's playing a rtm guitar part. I've loved this song for 35 years or so and never noticed. What a muppet I am. And Brancini's right on the nail with his dadas - please ignore my feeble effort. You can quite clearly see what Sparko's playing here: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrSx700tJ5Q[/media]

Not so much chords as an interval chug over the last chord at the end of the bridge which supports the solo, IIRC. From recollection (and assuming you're playing in the original key of G) Sparko lays a barre finger across the neck and plays a simple two-note blues-type shuffle part over the chord of D. The one where you play root and fifth, root and one tone above fifth (you can see theory's my weakness). Whether he barres at the 10th and plays it using the E and A strings or at the twelth fret using the D and G strings escapes me. Dada-dada-dada-dada-dada-da-dahhh. Basically the old Status Quo rhythm and let the end note ring before returning to the G (assuming that's the key you're in, as per the original). This should get you started. Hopefully someone else can verify / amend this.

[quote name='Starless' timestamp='1337468553' post='1660635'] I just hope I never meet the OP, the urge to punch him in the face for his part in the abuse of innocent kids would be just too strong.[/quote] We don't post that sort of stuff here. It is not acceptable. The hypotheticals spinning off this thread are putting the OP in for some serious flak. Perhaps it should be wound up. [color=#ffffff].[/color]

OK - here's the (revised) deal, based on everyone's suggestions: If the band (5-piece?) eventually covers half the cost, each will have paid 1/5th of 50%. The guitarist pays out the other 50%. So five members contributing equally each own 20% of half the value of the PA. If two members also want to use it on other projects then perhaps they should buy two shares to everybody else's one so drums, bass and keys pay 14% each and vox & guitar pay 29% each. Gig money should be reinvested in non-PA kit that benefits the band (Lights, drum riser, backdrop and - when necessary - pyrotechnics, lasers, strippers, etc). Each member of the band should contribute 20% of their (non-PA allocated) gig money into this 'Other Items' fund. For reasons of health and hygiene, everyone should own their own mikes, which should be clearly marked and designated as 'Smoking', 'Non-smoking' and 'Chesty cough, could be catching'. The guitarist and singer buy their own mic stands. The keys and bass should buy their own mics which should be headset mics, to avoid the cost of mic stands. The drummer buys neither vocal mics nor stands (but supplies his own drum mics). Each of you buys your own monitor - which is your own property, unless the duo needs to borrow it at which time a hire fee can be agreed. If the monitors are powered monitors and can accept a feed from a small mixer, they should be considered a 'small PA' and each member of the band should contribute 20% of the monitor cost to a central pot, which would reimburse each member equally. If anyone leaves they will be offered a fair amount, based on the resale value divided by the number of band members. But if someone contributes 20% of a £10k rig it doesn't necessarily mean that he can walk away with £2k when he leaves in 5 years time, he leaves with 20% of whatever the rig is worth in 5 years time. The value of the PA after 5 years must be assessed by an independent third party. The value might be nothing, if the PA gets stolen and isn't insured. PA insurance. Each band member who is not a member of the duo should contribute 14.5% of the insurance premium. The two duo members should contribute 58% of the premium. The rest of the band should pay the guitarist 29% of the notional 'storage costs' (excluding Insurance because that's already been covered off (apart from the duo, who owe themselves 58% of the 60%)), but the guitarist has to reinvest this money in a new van for the band, using the 'storage' money, his own money and any money the rest of you have put back for such things. For using the van every "share holder" pays an equal share of the running costs but not the tax disc or 58% of the insurance, because the guitarist uses the van for the duo. If someone leaves then he or she gets back his share ... Not the full money, but the remaining asset value usually minus 25% per year, after 4 years. So if the band lasts 4 years, nobody owes anyone anything. But if the band lasts 5 years or more, the guitarist owes everyone else money for the PA. Unless someone leaves early, which means that everyone owes the guitarist something, including the guitarist himself. If the whole band pay equal shares then those who want to use it away from full band gigs should hire it at an agreed fee. Unless the band splits up. The drummer should agree to look after all mains leads and keep them in a safe place like - say - right at the very back of his shed, up the chimney of his kids' Wendy house or in his reptile vivarium under the smaller of the two Anacondas. Simples!! [color=#ffffff].[/color]

[quote name='Jacqueslemac' timestamp='1337438691' post='1660032'] the guitarist lets his wife use it every now and again when she needs music for her belly dancing troupe. [/quote] Amazed that this one slipped past Discreet.

Of course, the logical outcome would be to stage all public performances round at their home. Mind you, they'd need to get a license, so maybe it would just be easier to move the house from gig to gig.

Revisiting the 'rental' option where the band dibs a percentage of gig fees to the guitarist to pay for the band's proportion of usage. Here's how to sell the idea to him. If the band (5-piece?) [i]eventually[/i] covers half the cost, each will have paid 1/5th of 50%. As a band member, he'll have paid out 10% of the cost. As himself, he'll have paid out the other 50%. So he will [i]eventually[/i] be proud owner of a PA which cost him 60% of the cost price. If - as the outright owner - he flogs the PA on, he might get circa 60% of the value, so [i]eventually[/i] it will have cost him (and the duo) [i]nothing[/i] to have a nice PA for as long as they want it. If he also flogs the old PA, he's actually quids up on the deal! Of course, this financially disbenefits the other band members - you each pay 10% of the cost but end up owning nothing. But this may be a sacrifice you are willing to make if it spreads the cost out, keeps the peace and enhances the quality of your gigs. It's quite a noble thing to do really, giving him a PA [color=#ffffff].[/color]

[quote name='3V17C' timestamp='1337436789' post='1659971'] they also brought the family dog [/quote] Report them. Report them [i]right now[/i]. Poor old Rover. How entirely disgraceful.

As is so often the case, the answer is "It depends..." If the guitarist intends to flog off the old PA and use the new one for the duo, then the covers band should theoretically be exposed to a [i]proportion[/i] of the cost of the new PA. And - to my mind - if one pays for something one should have part-ownership of that item. If one ceases to enjoy the benefits of said item, one should be entitled to a refund. Allowing for depreciation, one might then expect a refund of a lesser value than the initial payment - maybe 25-75% less - depending on the period that elapses between the purchase and one's departure from the band. This would reflect both the decreased value of the PA and the benefit one has derived from it. Here are some alternatives: * Guitarist pays for all of it, owns it, stores it, gets a larger share of any gig income. Once half the cost of the PA is paid for out of [i]part of [/i]each gig receipts, the guitarist ceases to 'charge' for the usage. Check out hire costs for a similar sized PA and apply a percentage of that to each gig's income. * Written agreement that each member owns a percentage of the kit and gets a refund on leaving. Staged basis of refunds: Year 1 = payment less 25%, Year 2 = payment less 50%, etc. * Each member owns a different component of the system - guitarist owns the power amps, singer owns the mixer, drummer owns the mains lead, etc Of course, it could all end in a hideous row and the band would split up. Cheapest option, really. [color=#ffffff].[/color]

[quote name='Ghost_Bass' timestamp='1337355304' post='1658764'] Why a string tee on the back of the headstock instead of the common strap button?!! [/quote] [quote name='douglas81' timestamp='1337429952' post='1659784'] Hmm, that's a good question. Not sure. Does anyone really attach a strap there anyway!? [/quote] [list=1] [*]The maker mistakenly attached a tree [*]The maker ran out of strap buttons and thought "I'll use a string tree. No-one will notice." [*]Someone thought a string tree would work better than a strap button. Wider diameter, see, and less chance of the strap coming adrift. [/list] Does anyone attach the strap there? Not these days, but maybe in the 60's. These minutiae aside, it's a lovely looking bass - good luck if you decide to sell it

Could one assume that the slowing down and the toys out of the pram might be considered uncharacteristic of your friend's normal behaviour? Perhaps there is something going on in the background of which you are unaware - marital difficulties, health problems, day-job issues? A discreet pause to let the dust settle and then an approach on the lines of "I'm sorry if I upset you - is there something wrong and can I help?". If he opens up, great. If there's no problem and he's just in a "can't be arsed, get out of my face" frame of mind, best leave him to fester for a bit. He'll come round. Drummers, eh - you either have to slap them or give them a big cuddle. Sometimes simultaneously. [color=#ffffff].[/color]

Best thing you've ever done. Keep it proud, keep it country, y'all. [color=#ffffff].[/color]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1337183802' post='1656838'] Yes, and also [i]extremely [/i]expensive. [/quote] £55 a day per child at our local creche.

Whether because of rising fuel costs, insurance premiums or government intervention, face it, we're all going to be driving a lot less in the future. And the fact is, crowded roads, long commutes and egregiously large vehicles do not make for a pleasant or efficient driving experience. Most vehicles spend the majority of their lives parked up somewhere and a transfer of costs from the static impost to the metered-mobile can only benefit those who use their vehicles on an occasional basis. For those dependent upon cars for commuting or employment, motoring costs must be seen as a component of the cost of working, just like wearing a suit or buying workboots or paying PLI. It's not that I'm unsympathetic to anyone's plight. But we've conflated an action - driving a car - with the idea of freedom. True, perhaps in the 1950's but not now. Motoring is a drag. A partial solution for those living in rural environments may be found in 'car clubs' - shared car ownership where one books a vehicle for the day upon which it is required. See here: [url="http://www.hn-lc.org.uk/what-were-doing/hooky-car-club"]http://www.hn-lc.org.../hooky-car-club[/url] By contrast, if one lives in suburbia, there are buses and trains. Marvellous things - not as cheap per mile a s a private car, but then one doesn't have to front up thousands in the first place. [color=#ffffff].[/color]

It is my confident prediction that they will be back in touch fairly soon.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1337160322' post='1656287'] Any children in the entertainment industry need proper supervision. [/quote] True, if they're [i]performers[/i] in the entertainment industry. Rules and regs coming out the ying-yang. Mate of mine is a Some-very-complicated-and-handwringing-job-title Child Performance Officer and he's rushed off his feet. As he says "Snooping is my business and business is good." But re-reading the original post, apart from the van thing (which is a bit dim) or taking kids into licensed premises, they're not actually doing anything illegal, afaics. What we're condemning is other peoples' choices which they're perfectly entitled to make. So no change here, then. The alternative is to leave them with a 'childminder' and some of those are pretty suspect, IMO. [color=#ffffff].[/color]

So we auditioned some drummers. One was really quite good and we agreed that we'd give him 'the call' after the weekend. Saturday night I get an email from him, saying how much he enjoyed himself and attaching some 'funny images' of himself in womens' underwear. The last shot had him bent over in crutchless knickers. Perhaps it was his way of saying 'No thank you'.

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1337014090' post='1654025'] 'Chimpy Wazzers' is quite a good band name, actually. [/quote] By strange coincidence, Derek 'Chimpy' Wazzers was the organist in Tony Goggle's second pro band - Lance Rapier and The New Musketeers (1960-62). [b][size=3]Wazzers with 1962 Vox Symphona (coconut slide-bar model) and Rect-A-Lite stand. [/size][/b]

[u][/u] [b][size=3]I like the bass player. Let's burn him last.[/size][/b]

[quote name='waynepunkdude' timestamp='1337008994' post='1653893'] In Crewe with a collection of immobile Fuegos, ouch. [/quote] I know. On the other hand, he's got the biggest cock I've ever seen. Turned round in the Gents at work one day, waggled it and said "Look at this!" It practically blocked out the sun. Anyway, lovely talking, Wayne, must be off. Things to see, people to do.

[quote name='waynepunkdude' timestamp='1337008305' post='1653879'] At least the guitarist didn't have to live in Crewe.[/quote] True. But it meant I never saw my friend again. Sob. According to FB he's got a 'collection' of Renault Fuegos now. Well, three Fuegos - two of 'em up on bricks.

[quote name='waynepunkdude' timestamp='1337007230' post='1653858'] I once banged the guitarist's ex on a rehearsal room floor. That was awkward. Nothing to do with this but any chance to tell that story, [/quote] My friend (an Elvis impersonator) split with his missus, kipped on his guitarist's sofa for six months then ran off to Crewe with the guitarist's wife. That was awkward. Nothing to do with annoying brats but any chance to tell that story. [color=#ffffff].[/color]

[u][/u] Who gives a rat's ass? If they can't do their twelve-times table or they get slaughtered by an axe-wielding maniac it's the parents' problem. That's not the point. The OP just wants a quiet life - let's not make it even worse for him by suggesting he's going to get done over by The Social for child-endangerment or neglectfully abetting a kiddy-fiddler. Hardly going to help him sleep nights, is it? [color=#ffffff].[/color]