skankdelvar

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1441386315' post='2858567'] How does one strike the balance between the extremes? [/quote] Simple. The formula for optimum number of monthly band posts is ((N / -50) where N= total number of posts and B = total number of bands posting. No need to thank me.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1441384216' post='2858554'] John Lenon was 'assassinated'. [/quote] He certainly was. I have good cause to remember the circumstances surrounding Mr JW Lennon's premature departure from the earthly realm. That night, the particularly scrumptious teen queen with whom I was enjoying a protracted dalliance called off our planned date in response to events. 'I'm going to the candle-light vigil in town,' she said with a quaver in her voice. 'That's a bit selfish of you,' I snapped. 'I was anticipating a no-holds-barred sex session tonight. It's what he would have wanted: Make love, not war...' [color=#ffffff].[/color]

Another thing: I may have been there for Kennedy (both of them, as it happens) and for Diana. But I account it a personal misfortune not to have been 'there' for Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. That way I'd have a hat trick of assassinations, always providing Diana was assassinated. Which she wasn't, of course. I think it's instructive that devotees of Mr Gavrilo Princip might want to denigrate John Wilkes Booth yet they do not. That's because armchair historians of Serbian paramilitary assassination squads generally have a sense of proportion and good humour denied to most bass players. [quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1441383612' post='2858547'] Funny that, but I was in the Cooperative record department buying The Beatles new second LP [i]With The Beatles[/i] that was released that day. [/quote] Always good to have an alibi. ([i]I saw you on the grassy knoll[/i] )

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1441382123' post='2858526'] Kennedy shot in '63. Compare that with Diana? I don't get Kennedy. I get Diana. [/quote] Well, you wouldn't get Kennedy. You weren't there. If you'd been there for Kennedy as you were there for Diana you'd have a personal basis for comparison but - through no fault of your own - you weren't there for Kennedy. So you won't ever 'get' it. Not your fault, of course, but there you go. No need to apologise. Anyway, like most people of my age, I remember exactly what I was doing when Kennedy was assassinated. I was leaning out of a window in the Texas Book Depository with a carbine in my hands.

I'm not entirely certain that certain bands' propensity to spam life trivia every five f**king seconds is the best way to achieve distinctiveness. 'If everybody's doing it, don't do it' is a mantra with much to recommend it. It also depends on the target market. Many 'young people' have the time, interest and energy to follow this sort of thing. Others may prefer to conserve their engagement, granting themselves an occasional visit to the band's website. Frankly, I'd aim to get a buzz going through performance and product then leave the heavy lifting to however few or many obsessive fans one may accrete.

[quote name='leftybassman392' timestamp='1441377248' post='2858462'] 'Can't Buy Me Love' on my big sister's Dansette (or at least it was up to the moment it threw it's drive belt and ground to a halt ); Kennedy assasination; Cuban missile crisis (the first time in my life I can remember actually listening to the news on our brand new tele-the-size-of-a-sideboard); French Indo-China (Vietnam to you sonny) [/quote] You are Billy Joel and I claim my £5.00 [i]Harry Truman, Doris Day, Red China, Johnnie Ray, South Pacific, Walter Winchell, Joe DiMaggio Joe McCarthy, Richard Nixon, Studebaker, Television, North Korea, South Korea, Marilyn Monroe[/i]

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1441375485' post='2858437'] If it turns out the OP looks nothing like either daddy or Grand-daddly Walton, sitting in a chair, possibly a rocker, on the stoop of his house, drinking "sippin' whiskey" and wearing dungarees and a straw hat, while setting the world to rights and saying "Dag-nabbit" occasionally - I shall hold you personally responsible. Don't tell me I'm not being fair in that. [/quote] In fact, the OP is as far from the stereotypical 'down-home good ol' boy' as one can get. Upon viewing one of his band's videos last weekend, my good lady wife of many years was heard to observe (somewhat to my envious chagrin) that Mr Blue in no small wise resembles Mr Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson - 'with more hair, better cheekbones and better dressed'. She added: '...and that's a kicking rhythm section. They make it look effortless. Not like you.'

[quote name='paul h' timestamp='1441375346' post='2858433'] I don't even know what a "the beatles" is. [/quote] Consider yourself fortunate. It will save you a lot of heartache in the longer term.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1441374267' post='2858421'] I'd beg to differ on that, "not getting" is - to me - a way of belittling a differing opinion. Possibly down to my once knowing the most self-loving egocentric you ever met, the proverbial "so far up he can see daylight" who's cop-out was always the same phrase. Though I did see the "humor" in his post, which is why I said "geddit" in a later response (My talents are wasted etc etc ad lib, exeunt stage left)[/quote] I can see why the phrase 'Not getting it' might rankle, there being an association with an unlovable individual. In this case, I can imagine no one less 'up himself' than the OP, him being a modest, likeable chap entirely devoid of pretence and artifice. A bit like you, me and a select few here on BC. (General outgoing) [quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1441374267' post='2858421']I represent what you're trying to incinerate!............ and anyway - flares are coming back in! [/quote] Let's hope they're the right kind of flares [size=3][b]BassChat mob to Blue[/b]: Stamp out bad opinions![/size]

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1441371695' post='2858383'] A consequence of that statement is that the non-gettee isn't entitled to have tastes or opinions of their own. [/quote] Stu, me old love. This is the fundamental misunderstanding into which so many otherwise well-meaning posters have tumbled. At no point has anyone (including the OP) suggested that we aren't allowed to have opinions or tastes. Or that their opinions are [i]wholly[/i] invalid. Or that anyone's tastes are deficient. Or that some musical epiphanies are more personally valid than others. To draw that interpretation is to misapprehend. With his tongue planted firmly in his cheek the OP acknowledges his opinion to be slightly more correct than all others. First among equals, if you like. Some have responded with reasoned objections. Others with abuse. Still others in a state of injured self-esteem. The commonality is a kind of 'How dare you think something like that?' and a sense that - 'Oh my God - this sort of thinking could bring the forum to its knees'. Stu - of all people here I would have thought you'd support the idea of holding an unfashionable view and politely sticking to one's guns in the face of provocative comments from a bunch of offended pinkos.

Among the many attributions for Mr Blue's opinion, it has been advanced by some here that the reason he holds it is because he is: * American and they're like that * A hopeless nostalgist * A troll * A bit 'superior' * Unwilling to 'see reason' * In possession of a 'bad attitude' * An 'old person' (this from someone I suspect is no spring chicken but would prefer us to think they are) * Just plain wrong and too obstinate to admit it Reviewing these frankly baseless allegations, it finally dawned on me. Mr Blue's 'crime' is nothing to do with his appreciation of the Beatles. He is reviled by some simply because he does not subscribe to the fashionable belief that 'everyone's opinion is as valuable as everyone else's'. In their eyes, Blue's unwillingness to compromise his belief makes him a [i]bad person[/i] which means it's OK to say nasty things about him because [i]bad people must be punished[/i]. So off they go with the insults and snide comments, In my view, those who have attacked him on a personal basis embrace a range of unfortunate qualities, including hubris, egotism, bullying forum vigilantism and - possibly - aggression stemming from stress-induced psychological dysfunctionality. The common factor is these members [i]just can't handle[/i] the idea someone's posts don't carry the usual mimsying proviso of YMMV or IMO. In short, they are 'offended' by certainty. So they try to enforce a kind of diffidence and false modesty on the grounds that someone who doesn't cave in to group pressure is 'being difficult'. A trap that's easy to fall into if you hold the mildly fascist belief that the group view must rule supreme and the individual who differs should be punished. This thread has been fantastically useful in flushing out those who believe in the dictatorship of the majority and who are willing to demean someone to their face in pursuit of 'freedom of expression for all - except when we don't like it'. You know who you are

[quote name='rushbo' timestamp='1441318792' post='2857986'] Twelve pages ... and no one has mentioned Robert Johnson? ... he's pretty close to the fountainhead. [/quote] Recently published work by respected anthropologist Professor Theboy has established that the progenitor of [i]all[/i] music was Mr [url="http://basschat.co.uk/topic/266871-the-beatles-curse/page__view__findpost__p__2856603"]Ugg[/url], a prehistoric caveman located somewhere near what is now Catford. The link between Mr Ugg, the itinerant bluesman Blind Lemon Pie and Mr Pie's journeyman companion and protege Robert Johnson is subjected to forensic analysis in Professor Theboy's technical appendix. In any event, the most influential 20th century acoustic guitarist was Maybelle Carter. So poo to Rambling Bob. [size=3][b]Maybelle Carter[/b]: Johnny Cash's mother-in-law, inventor of a picking style and fount of etc., etc.[/size]

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1441317381' post='2857976'] So you mean it's all a conspiracy? BassChat is part of the new world order? [/quote] Quite so. With Kiwi as the Emperor Palpitate. [size=3]Da-da-da-da-da - Puttin' on the Ritz![/size]

It's just like watching a particularly gifted Toreador.

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1441314225' post='2857927'] I don't feel any better than anyone. I feel more insightful. LOL [/quote] Who says Yanks can't do irony? Outstanding

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1441313907' post='2857922'] So why do we get so precious about what we use? [/quote] If we didn't, we wouldn't have anything to talk about. Every thread would be about three posts long; forum traffic would dry up; Ped wouldn't have any money to buy nice cakey things from Greggs and there would be lamentations a-go-go. That - my good friend - is why.

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1441299278' post='2857753'] It was a very enjoyable evening, and I agree, the student performances were very personal and even moving at points. I was brought on a journey by some. Kashmir, although great to listen to, really didn't have the same emotional impact. [/quote] RE: the gig that started this whole thread. It was of note that the tutors and students were using fairly basic gear. The backline comprised a Blues Deluxe and a Tiny Terror (IIRC) while that bloke out of the Kaiser Chiefs was going through one of those teeny £350 Ampeg Micro Stacks. The vocals and keys went through a titchy pair of speakers on tripods. In a 200-300 capacity room with raked auditorium seating the sound from such an unpromisingly 'basic' set up was remarkably huge and clear. [color=#ffffff].[/color]

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1441298264' post='2857738'] I would be very interested to see how raids on gigs to enforce a musical equivalent of the Sumptuary laws would pan out. [/quote] I don't think we talk about the Sumptuary laws anywhere near as often as we should. The position on the 'Bass Player Hat' needs revision, IMO. The perception of 'unnecessarily expensive gear' bears some investigation too. Of course it is right and proper that we should be able to buy whatever we like without fear of criticism. But if we accept the law of diminishing returns (as I believe we do) then what exists in the gap between the instrument that one plays and one which is half the price but just as functionally effective. That which resides in the balance may be one (or more) of a hundred things: misplaced understanding; egotism; aesthetic pleasure; personal estimations of what is conceptually 'valid'; audience expectations; compliance with informal 'heritage' laws; physical 'feel'; technical appreciation of the instrument's quality. It is not mandatory that the debate descend into acrimony simply because we may incorrectly attribute the possession of a 'nice' instrument to misplaced self-aggrandisement. It is all so much deeper and more interesting than that. For example: why do some audience members care about whether a bass is a Fender or not? What is in their minds? Should we explore their reasoning? What happens if we do not comply with expectations? Does a 'real Fender' make audiences come back for more? Do they know that some Fenders are actually Squiers with hooky logos? I'm totally on this audience engagement thing at the moment.

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1441292852' post='2857663'] I must say when we met last week, first thing you said was "There's a nice Gibson J-32". [/quote] At the risk of further reinforcing my anorak status I must point out the guitar was a [i]J45[/i] - an instrument for which my GAS is without bounds. [quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1441292852' post='2857663'] Everything was very much to do with making musical connections, not getting bogged down in tone and gear. And everyone sounded great! [/quote] And such was my view having watched the post-workshop concert. But another thing struck me which I have subsequently discussed with a couple of close friends who play. In the course of the evening the 'student' acts were interspersed with performances by the course tutors. Lovely giving chaps though the tutors may be, their performances lacked the directness and apparent honesty that radiated from the students. There was an intervening veil - almost like a net curtain - that came between the tutor-performer and the audience; whereas the students made a strong, direct emotional connection. The tutors were clearly more 'musically accomplished' and not in a flashy way. Yet the sense of two-way communication was lacking, almost as if the self-awareness of being a performing 'musician' placed a kind of barrier between the performer and the audience. That 'self-awareness' detracted from the quality of the engagement. The students were communicating; the tutors were performing. It's a subtle difference and not to the discredit of the pro tutors. But it was noticeable to the extent that I turned my band's subsequent rehearsal over to a reconsideration of what we're trying to do. We chucked technical and tonal expectations out of the window, stripped some songs right back and focussed on just listening to ourselves and to what was happening in the silences. Big improvement. So thanks for the invite and for an illuminating evening. We should have done a selfie.

The injured pride and rampant insecurity peppered around this thread are - in their way - quite deliciously indicative of the internet's power to reduce otherwise uninvolved and uncommitted individuals to the silliest of observations in the cause of bolstering their opinions; none of which - pro or con the original assertion - have any real value beyond that of dark pixels on a light background. The original contention is very simple: (i) The Beatles had the biggest, widest impact and influence on their audience and on their peers than any other pop group before or since. That much is probably true. (ii) Those who were not present at the time will find it difficult or impossible to accurately estimate the nature of events as they transpired (iii) To have contemporaneously attended upon the Beatles phenomenon will have granted the observer / participant a specific insight into [i]that particular phenomenon[/i] which will be denied to others who were 'not there'. Seems reasonable. (iv) Other epiphanies are equally valid on a personal basis but when viewed in a historical context may reasonably be considered to have been a less formative influence on the wider development of the popular music form in the 20th century I mean, none of this is particularly difficult to understand nor does it in anyway devalue the very, [i]very[/i] special personal value of individuals who dissent from the view, despite the misapprehensions, misconstructions and [i]maledicta[/i] that flit around the thread like bats at twilight . Frankly - and as I mentioned before - it seems like some of us are rather upset that Blue holds his opinion and is - moreover - laudably resistant to all efforts to make him cave in. The fact that some are resorting to ad-hominems kinda means they've lost the argument; but kudos to the constructive debaters. Nice work, Gents. [color=#ffffff].[/color]

* Keith Richards and Ronnie Wood claim to enjoy a bit of four string action. * IIRC Bryan Adams switched to bass for at least one tour. * Sheryl Crow has been seen toting a bass * When not scourging his electric viola, Mr John Cale played bass in the Velvet Underground * Elvis Presley is credited with playing electric bass on his recording of 'You're so square' and chatted almost exclusively about bass guitars with Paul McCartney on the occasion they met.

Although I'm a bit of a gear head I often find myself listening to the instrument rather than focussing on the song I'm playing. That's more in the context of solo acoustic guitar (which is my main focus atm) than in the context of bass playing in an ensemble where the minutiae of tone gets lost anyway. Sometimes I have to force myself not to think about the [i]nature[/i] of the sounds coming out of the instrument and concentrate instead on what the sounds are actually [i]doing[/i] in a musical sense. After a little while I settle down into the song and everything's fine. Gear can sometimes be an impediment to forming a communication. The danger lies in sitting there playing a particularly scrumptious chord and thinking 'Doesn't this sound nice and Gibson-y'. Two hours later the missus calls up the stairs and the song you meant to write remains entirely unfinished.

I mean, it's all very well saying 'But what about the epiphany I had when I saw the Housemartins at the Piper Club in Hull in 19-er-something? That's valid!' Well, yes, one's epiphanies and experiences are always valid. But when considered in a historical context it's like the difference between World War 2 and the Falklands conflict. It is not a question of validity. It is a question of scale and scope. Tie this in with the social possibilities inherent to a disruption of The American Way and you can see why the establishment and the counter-culture alike saw the Beatles as a Big Thing. See below - FBI file from August 1964 detailing Beatles concert appearance as '[i]a perfect vehicle for riots if racial elements or organisation subversive or otherwise were to capitalise on this vehicle[/i]'. And that's even before things got really trippy and anti-war:

Painy bought my old Pearl noise gate pedal. Nice easy deal, clear comms, swift payment and a complete gentleman. Trade with confidence! (Edit for speling). [color=#ffffff].[/color]