skankdelvar

All of the old reviews have been archived as 'legacy reviews'. Everything is still there. Quickest way to get to them is google the item of interest + harmony central. Nearly always drops you straight in to the legacy section. Then just reverse up the category hierarchy. Frankly, HC perpetrated a total disaster which eviscerated one of the more useful sites on the web. It all happened some months ago and provoked a shitstorm of biblical proportions. Some of the angriest posts I've ever seen and well worth reading

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1017312' date='Nov 9 2010, 11:00 AM']Huh, I never heard that. Did you know Joanna s a cousin to Robin Lumley of Brand X?[/quote] I didn't know that! Those Betties in full: * Clementine Churchill * Olivia De Havilland * Hattie Jacques * Joanna Lumley * Mrs Tinman

[quote name='tauzero' post='1016096' date='Nov 8 2010, 10:14 AM']Quite. I'm currently working on a major stage move - for the right hand, replacing throwing the goat \m/ or the peace sign m\/ with the Vulcan "Live long and prosper" sign \\// and it's pretty hard getting into position for that. Theory just doesn't teach you how to set a trend.[/quote] Quite. In the far more critical area of 'Presentation', one must step outside narrow musical cliches. I find Wilson, Kepple and Betty to be a fertile source of inspiration Did you know there were actually 5 different Betty's over the years, including Hattie Jacques and Joanna Lumley?

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='1016700' date='Nov 8 2010, 06:41 PM']Are you absolutely sure about that?[/quote] Er - fairly sure. Let me have a think about it. Yes, absolutely abhorrent. Except in certain circumstances.

Any attempt to take an absolute and final position on (Theory / Reading / Whatever) versus (Feel / Groove / Whatever) is doomed to ignominious ridicule. Because the value of a particular skill or a specific approach is not a universal constant. It is dependant on context and circumstance. There are just too many variables for anyone to state that with honest confidence that one approach or the other is best - or even mildly preferable - without honourably adding the caveat that each individual's mileage may vary. Absolutism is an abhorrence.

[quote name='DanOwens' post='1016571' date='Nov 8 2010, 05:00 PM']I too realise that this is all within single-axis spectra and is at risk of becoming a 'theory-or-groove' type binary argument, but I believe we are better than that as a community and this is a good chance to show it.[/quote] Colossal kudos to Dan for proposing his contention and articulating his thoughts with such elegance and balance. This is the level of debate towards which we should strive. That said, I only use a compressor and I don't gear-stalk bass pedals so I'm out

Make it 10. Just another 11,900 BC-ers to go

It really is appalling.

I'd have thought it was pretty clear by now that: * It's possible to deliver satisfying musical outcomes without being able to read or have a deep knowledge of theory * Enhanced knowledge is a good thing for all sorts of reasons * An inability to recognise that different values and approaches can happily co-exist in a spirit of compromise is intellectually unsustainable and is more illuminative of the general mind-set of the debater than it is of the debate.

[quote name='skej21' post='1014424' date='Nov 6 2010, 04:12 PM']Freemasons are a fraternal orgainsation and have secret handshakes etc ... Whether this is true or myth, it's a bloody good idea IMO.[/quote] It's true. I'm not a Mason but years ago I found out how to do the 'I'm a really [i]very [/i]top bloke' handshake and had lots of fun with it. As for the 'do another bassist a favour' thing? Nice idea, but wide open to litigation from unsuccessful candidates.

Bit of a way for me, but have a good gig.

Read, schmead. Far better to devote valuable practice time to learning little dance steps, playing l/h hammer-ons so you can wave to the audience, that sort of thing. As for 'quality' gear, pah! Spend the cash on getting your teeth fixed. A cheeky boyish smile goes a lot further than leaden 'professionalism' in this business.

I liked that a lot. Plenty of character and it made me smile. Nice work, Sir.

While I'm quite prepared to accept that getting the crud off your strings is a good thing, I still can't quite see [i]how [/i]it makes a difference to the amplified sound. I mean, the string's metal and it wobbles around over a magnet. Which makes the electrickal sound, like. But one's dead skin and sweat isn't made of metal and therefore doesn't get 'heard' by the - er - pick-up. So how can removing it make a difference to the sound if it wasn't getting 'heard' in the first place?

But just imagine if Squire's career falters and he has to take dep gigs. Say, with a Barbadian steel band or a Ragtime combo. Without the dots, that would be him finished. So, on balance, if he really wants to get on in this business and be taken seriously, he should learn to read before it's too late.

[quote name='Low End Bee' post='1012084' date='Nov 4 2010, 02:21 PM']5-2= the answer[/quote] [b]And the Lord spoke[/b] saying, "First shalt thou gather thy band members, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then hast thou a band."

[quote name='Al Heeley' post='1009515' date='Nov 2 2010, 12:33 PM']I'm interested in why relic'ing is such an emotive subject, it does polarise and excite opinions.[/quote] Good point. FWIW, it seems to me that the emotiveness tends to be more on one side than the other. I've never seen anyone start a thread titled "Relics! Aren't they great!". But I've seen plenty that take the opposite tack, not that I'm particularly bothered I suspect it boils down to our attitudes towards that desirable, intangible commodity 'authenticity'. In a confusing world of shifting values and expanding material choice, authenticity is a kind of 'truth' and a refuge sought by many. But authenticity is not absolute. It resides in the mind of the beholder and is entirely personal to the individual. Thus, we have shades of authenticity and a consequent opportunity for debate and - sometimes - unhappy disagreement. Some people might like relics because the visual cues create an instant back story for the instrument and (perhaps) by association, the player. Nothing wrong with that and - as an image tool - far better than a pirate bandanna over a shiny dome. For others, a relic embodies a kind of authenticity, which makes them happy. For some, relics are the reverse of authenticity, in that they are perceived to be a forgery - a calculated act of deception. A relic is an assault on authenticity. And perhaps a minority feel that the owner of a relic is passing themselves off as possessing 'musicianly' characteristics to which they are not entitled to lay claim. For myself, I do not subscribe to this view, but I think it's out there. To my mind there are two issues here. * "Why do people buy relics?" * "Why do people get annoyed about relics?" And the answer's the same for both. People value 'authenticity' very highly. But they perceive it in different ways.

[quote name='Alfie' post='1009440' date='Nov 2 2010, 11:31 AM']Rory Gallagher ...Taste [/quote] See what he did there? The thing about Rory Gallagher is that he always attributed the remarkable amount of wear on his guitars to the very 'acidic' nature of his sweat. He eventually died of a liver dysfunction. Any connection?

Tune it up every few months, evict crusty meths drinkers on an ad hoc basis.

TBH, I don't know that there [i]has[/i] to be a point. It's a customer option like anything else - colour, fretboard material, 'hot' pickups, bridge type. But if it is to be done, better that it be done well. The old 'belt sander over the elbow cutaway' ruse is both ugly and the mark of the hobbyist. The Roadworns are indeed a bit over-templated As for specific guitars - e.g. Clapton's 'Blackie', Jaco's 'Bass Of Doom', Billy Gibbons' 'Pearly Gates' - why not? And if the artist is still alive, they presumably get to trouser a few bob. If they're dead, they've got bigger things on their mind - like half a ton of marble.

[quote name='arthurhenry' post='1007461' date='Oct 31 2010, 03:36 PM']"Lefty loosey, righty tighty" only applies if the adjustment nut is at the heel of the neck. If it's at the headstock, it's the other way around![/quote] NOI, but - like Silddx - most every headstock end truss rod nut I've ever encountered has been lefty-loosey Key thing here is [i]always[/i] loosen the strings before adjusting relief. The reason I use feeler gauges is because I'm never sure exactly where to put my eye in relation to the string in order to sight it against the mark on the ruler. Also, being a bit long-sighted it's easier for me to see the string deflect upwards when the feeler gauge is too thick. Don't worry about things not being right first time. Setting up a bass or a guitar is a game of incremental adjustments to each variable until it feels right. And even if you start with the Mfr's recommended action / relief, it's pretty difficult to get a nice low action if the nut's too shallow / deep, the frets are worn or there's a bit of a hump in the neck. Most tuner pedals are a bit 'gross' for setting intonation - here's a 'free trial & register if you like' software tuner that goes to 1 cent and allows for variable temperaments, custom sweetened tunings etc : [url="http://www.aptuner.com/cgi-bin/aptuner/apmain.html"]http://www.aptuner.com/cgi-bin/aptuner/apmain.html[/url] Just plug your bass into your PC and off you go.

1985 was a bit of an odd year for Fender. After the CBS sale in March, the Fullerton plant closed down. With no US factory, all instruments were sourced from Japan. In October, Fender opened the Corona (USA) facility, but with only 10 staff and a limited, 'high-end' output, while supplementing this with Jap instruments badged as Fenders. Odds would probably have it that lots of 85 Fenders are Japs from outsource factories. Which is, of course, neither here nor there.

[quote name='AndyTravis' post='1005978' date='Oct 30 2010, 02:00 AM']Is he still doing the 'Peace' sign a lot?[/quote] It's the thumb's-up thing that boils my piss. Nobody I know has done [i]that [/i]since 1949.

Whether McCartney is a good bass player and whether the Beatles wrote 'good' songs is a debate so covered in tiretracks as to be virtually worthless. And, in the end, it just comes down to personal taste. The 'influence' thing is often seen as an issue of musicianship and absorption of licks, sounds, techniques. But there's so much more. * They're responsible for the idea that bands could - and [i]should [/i]- 'progress'. Before the Beatles, bands were expected to last for a couple of years or so. They'd put out pretty much the same stuff across their brief career. The fact the Beatles' fame ensured they lasted for longer required that they had to periodically re-invent themselves. Thank the Beatles for Metallica refusing to lay down and die. * The Beatles killed Tin Pan Alley. Today, everyone's a songwriter. Unfortunately. * They moved beyond the idea of the Pop album as a collection of singles and filler. They used innovative studio recording techniques to go beyond 'song capture' and into the realm of audio creativity. It is the Beatles fault that we have 96 track desks and infinite channel capacity on DAW's. To the extent that recording live to two-track is seen as wildly radical. * The Beatles acted as a bridgehead for the idea of Pop as Art. Without the Beatles, no psychedelia, no Floyd, Velvets, JAMC, Husker Du, no chinstroking rockers. Just big sh*t-eating smiles and waves to the audience. * By virtue of their ubiquity and marketability, the Beatles opened the door to Pop merchandising, tat, spin-offs, stalkers and conspiracy theories. * The Beatles absorbed and re-purposed significantly different musical forms - reggae, folk, psychedelia, blues, soul. In so doing they exposed musos and audiences alike to new sounds and textures. You could make a shaky case for the Beatles being indirectly responsible for the idea of sub-genres within pop music * Without the Beatles there would have been no 'British Invasion' and no US exposure for bands like The Stones, Animals, Yardbirds. Muddy Waters would have spent the rest of his life doing cash in hand odd jobs and Blues Rock would not have been invented, so no bent note Les Paul Marshall Stackery. * The irreverant, provocative intelligence of their public pronouncements raised the bar for musos everywhere. Simple anodyne comments like "Thanks to all our fans and my favourite colour is blue" gave way to arguments about spirituality, The Establishment, war and - er - Universal Love. Without the Beatles, no Bono, no Zappa and no Silddx. * Philip Norman makes a convincing case for The Beatles as a major component in changing attitudes to authority, morals, sex and drugs. He also blames the Beatles for today's solipsistic Entitlement culture. Without the Beatles, chavs wouldn't exist and everyone would know their place, according to Mr Norman. And he may be right. Now you could argue that lots of other people were beavering away putting this stuff together and you'd be correct. But the Beatles were the catalyst, the bridgehead and the force which propelled isolated, nascent practices and ideas into the mainstream. So you don't have to like the Beatles - I don't much - to at least tip your hat to their influence on the landscape we inhabit on a daily basis.

Couple of days ago I received a mail from 'Grant at Korg' offering discounted behringer gear from the Behringer Distributor Clearence (sic) shop on ebay. Which I couldn't find. Strange days, my friends.