TrevorR

It's looking like a properly good issue from a look at that cover... Mr Lawson supported by Messrs Taylor, Bailey, Pomeroy and Hungate with a side order of Wal bass review (am I biased? Yes, of course!)

My rig is a Little Mark II with a compact 2x10 and compact 1x15 as in the avatar <-. I like the flexibility it gives. The 2x10 for rehearsals, coffee bar gigs etc (which it give more than enough vol and bass for) and the two cabs for bigger gigs or vocal/acoustic only PA covers gigs (pubs, weddings, functions etc). The LMII is light and in a rucksack case. The LMII and the 2x10 seems more back friendly to me than the equivalent Markbass combo. I love the Markbass stuff but you could get a similar result with lots of other lightweight brands.

[quote name='Firey Jack' timestamp='1442406741' post='2866709'] I used the 12 in an old Ashdown combo. I've got a TC RS112 on order which will be here for next gig week on Sat - excited about that! Still using the 2 x 8 - hoping to replace this with another RS112 eventually - costs permitting [/quote] Before you dole out shed loads of cash you might find that having adjusted your tone and raised the cabs off the floor that the 15and 8s combination works just fine...

[quote name='walbassist' timestamp='1442303294' post='2865799'] PS Trev, belated welcome to Basschat! [/quote] Ta, Gareth! Nice to finally be here. What on earth took me so long?

[quote name='jonsmith' timestamp='1442339658' post='2866229'] Why not? [/quote] [quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1442333156' post='2866136'] Different things require different gear. Recording is about the best possible sound, and the best possible version of you playing. People can and will pick your parts out of the mix and listen to them intensely. The same problem isn't faced in a local pub cover band. [/quote] I'd be willing to bet that Jon's "Why not?" was, more precisely, "Why wouldn't you want the audience at a local pub gig to have the best possible version of you playing live to them as well?" It's a sentiment which also rings true to me.

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1442342154' post='2866256'] You mean why don't the audience at the Washboard & Fiddle give specific instruments as much scrutiny as somebody who buys and album and devotes time to listen to it? Because they're different audiences. They want different things. The people in the local pub aren't interested in how much a bass costs, or what kind of music it's tone suits. They want to hear the classics that every band plays there every weekend, so they can stumble around, singing the wrong lyrics completely out of tune, and have a blast doing it. [/quote] Interesting that we are back here again... "Why play a nice instrument when the audience don't care/aren't equipped to appreciate that it's a nice instrument?" Numerous posters has stated clearly that in their opinion this question is based on an incorrect postulate, i.e. That instrument choice is in any way related to what a particular audience might think of it. I really really doubt that anyone really chooses an instrument to buy or to play at a gig on that basis. As others have said, 99% of any audience are likely to know the difference between a Dingwall bass and a Shine bass, or indeed care. What the will want is a good gig. Pure and simple, even though they are unlikely to be able to quantify what makes up a good gig. We choose instruments to fit our own unique set of criteria - economic, ergonomic, aesthetic, pragmatic , prejudiced (e.g. I just don't like the look of Laklands or Warwicks and wouldn't play one no mTter what however "good" or VFM they are) and so on. So, whether I play at the Whippet & Bludgeon, a corporate function, or the Albert Hall I take my two Wals because that's what works for me irrespective of venue, they are my basses, they are what I play and that is it. Others choose differently and that is fine because that is what works for them. Any consideration of who the audience would be doesn't begin to factor in that choice. Wherever I am playing! Whatever the make up of the audience, I want to play to the best of my meagre abilities and those are the basses I feel most comfy on and which help me do that.

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1441296630' post='2857719'] No, just interested to know why cheaper gear isn't good enough for many "weekend warriors". [/quote] [quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1441403715' post='2858739'] ...It isn't that I think that expensive gear is bought to impress an audience for local pub covers bands, more that it simply doesn't impress the audience, because it's only musicians who get so into the detail of such a thing, and that's just another reason as to why it's not required to have flashy gear. And it's not even that I'm saying that certain venues require certain gear, as somebody suggested earlier - utter hogwash. Simply that really expensive and boutique instruments simply aren't required in that setting. [/quote] I'm still fascinated to know why you make the various correlations which you have... Between gig setting and expense of gear, between a notional level of "requirement" and level of gig. I'm not entirely sure you've unpacked the thinking and/or justification behind these statements. It seems to imply a level of correlation behind venue quality and your gear choices (in terms of quality and price). How do you see that working? For instance, what IS the top level of what is "required" for that playing setting... And who decides. Or is it simply that you are wondering why people who will never play Wembley (and only ever play or aspire to play in journeyman settings) ever buy expensive, hand-built or boutique gear as opposed to buying a MIM Frender and being happy with that. If it is the latter I suspect it is just that the choices/thought processes involved are so more complex and human than some sliding scale of gear price appropriateness vs status within the music industry. I think all of the range of answers to that complex thought process have been alluded to... From "yes, I'm quite content playing my Squier" to "because I've always fancied an [insert expensive bass name here] and now I can afford it" via "well, playing a bass that I love and that speaks to me gives me more confidence as a player and so I play better" and "I reckon that it's going to sound 'better' and be more reliable than a cheapie'". Ultimately, don't they all validly answer the question which you've posed. And since they are all purely personal choices aren't they all valid. You are happy with your Faith acoustic (they are great little guitars), others are happy with their Gibsons, Taylor's, Martins, Froggy Bottoms and Olsens irrespective of how much money they will ever earn them.

Rob, was planning to arrange one for this autmn but family stuff and being asked to chat about Wals at the SE Bass Bash in a couple of weeks kinda sidelined that. We should do one in the new year some time. There are a number of rehearsal studios we could hire near me which are very convenient for M25/M3/M4/London trains...

Yes, Dave Bainbridge is great! Been a huge fan for years from back when he was working for Adrian Snell. Remember seeing Iona's (something like) second ever gig at Greenbelt. Sitting on the grass right in front of Nick Begg's rig not knowing who to spend more time watching, Nick's stick playing or Dave's guitar... Always catch Iona live when I can.

Just a little shot of my modest collection... [i][b]HA! YEAH, I WISH!!!!! [/b][/i]This was from a "Wal Fest" gathering in 2006 in Woking... some fine instruments in that collection. Spot the double necked midi bass and the Pro IIE on which Too Shy was recorded!

[quote name='Phil Starr' timestamp='1442219313' post='2865139'] ... I would imagine OGWT would have attracted those people who were interested in the music and a team developed... [/quote] You'd have thought so however, if you listen to any of Mark Ellen and David Hepworth's reminiscences of the Whistle Test days it was clear that (outside the key production crew) the crews were simply assigned by rota and would frankly rather have been doing the Cilla Black show or Panorama. That is to say, "proper" BBC TV shows. Not what they considered to be ridiculous fluff with no lasting merit. Funny how perspectives on rock music have changed over time...

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1441951728' post='2863149'] Everything by Kate Bush. [/quote] To quote Not The Nine OClock News... "...you only buy my latest hits, because you like my latex t*ts..."

[quote name='barneyg42' timestamp='1442210755' post='2865085'] I always carry spare heads!! [/quote]

[quote name='jonsmith' timestamp='1442187798' post='2865060'] Reading some of the comments in the thread, some felt that there was no need to strive for good sound in the pub, because the audience wouldn't notice anyway. This seems a little contemptuous to me, but if it's a justification for not taking the gear you believe will deliver the best sound, then to me that reads as not being that fussed about how you sound. If we all do care about our sound, then the original question is answered - we discuss what gear we might use in the pub and take the best equipment we have available because we want to achieve the best sound possible, whatever our budget might be. Of course best might not be most expensive, but there is still a decision being made out of a desire to give the best one can. It was suggested that this wasn't required down the pub. [/quote] For me this is the interesting question which hasn't been addressed in this thread. The implication that different venues warrant/require/deserve different quality of gear. The logical corollary to that is that the Whippet & Snorkel only warrants a Squier, a wedding gig warrants a MIM Fender, a theatre gig warrants a U.S. standard and the Royal Albert Hall warrants a U.S. Custom Shop model. It has been stated as an assertion but there hasn't been any unpacking of the reasoning behind it. For me that type of thinking is wrongheaded and, frankly, irrelevant to my world. Any and all audiences deserve the best performance I can give. For that reason I've never had a problem playing "cheesy" crowd pleasing songs... because they please the crowd and for me that has been at the core of the job of any band I've played in. I personally own 4 electric basses. Two are (I suppose) vintage boutique types, one is the first bass I ever got (and still a cracking bass to play), the other is a Frankenjazz project bass. I play all of them because I love them. They are my basses. They are the ones I play. End of. I don't rank them against each other (although for, say, a 60s theme night I might use the Jazz for purely aesthetic reasons). When I gig I always take two basses, as insurance against a failure (the fact that in 25 years of playing I've only had a ,problem materialise twice - once with a bass, once with an amp - is neither here nor there). The show must go on. The fact that since I then have 2 basses I can swap different basses for different songs is a) a personal indulgence and b ) a personal artistic choice. Sure I can play any song with any of my basses but to my ears A Town Called Malice sounds so right on my Pro bass and Lady Marmalade or Babylon sounds so nice on my MK 1 Custom. Do the audience notice... Consciously almost certainly not but if I give a better performance for a load of indefinable mojo related reasons they will on a subconscious level (and their feet will hopefully notice too).

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1442174806' post='2864931'] I have a hunch that any deficiencies were down to the cabs more than the amps, as a decent old valve 100 watter through modern speakers is a joy to play through IMO. [/quote] Interestingly, when Wal introduced their Mk2 5 string bass they added a low pass filter to the preamp specifically for those players whose speakers couldn't cope with the lower frequencies being produced by the low B string. Such were the average speakers which were more common back then. I suspect, though that the target deficient amps they were thinking of were rather more Laney Linebacker than Ampeg 8x10! :-)

[quote name='Hobbayne' timestamp='1442180605' post='2865010'] And also bare in mind, the sound of these shows were mixed to suit the sound of your average 1970's Ferguson mono telly speaker. They didnt know that in the future we would be watching these shows on our state of the art - hi def - nicam -surround sound tellys. [/quote] That was what sprung to mind for me. As others have said, I suspect that the mixing and mastering was more about a sound that pretty low quality 4" oval TV speaker could cope with (and that wasn't deep rounded bass). Again, hence the In Concert approach of a broadcasting some concerns on BBC2 with the soundtrack broadcast on Radio 1 for much higher (mono, AM radio!!!) sound quality.

Looks like someone sneezed while using the band saw. If you buy it, check for blood splatter and fingers stuck under the strings...

Shouldn't do. Most of the feqs being tamed won't really register in the sub range. At worst you might need to tweak your tone settings a smidgen but I think that's not that likely...

[quote name='spongebob' timestamp='1441706348' post='2860977'] I find that pretty much most, if not all, modern productions leave me cold - they all sound to me like they've been made in either an aircraft hanger (wide and spacious, no feeling), or that everything is squashed together (love Rush, and the album, but step forward 'Clockwork Angels'). Modern drums go puffffttt, and cymbals shhhhhttt, whereas we all know proper cymbals go tssssst! There's science here, chaps! ....and that's before the modern bass tones - no definition. Rant over! [/quote] Funny, I had thought that the mastering on Clockwork Angels was a bit of an improvement over their more recent stuff. But then again, it may just be that after having my ears bludgeoned into submission by Vapour Trails and Snakes & Arrows, a Rush CD that was only badly over mastered was a blessed relief in comparison! And don't get me started on the Rush In Rio CD...

But c'est fini now... :-( ---------------------------------UPDATE------------------------------------- Thanks for all of the interest, guys. While we wish we could give free strings to everyone, there's only a limited amount available. I've sent private messages to the selected testers. If you didn't receive a PM, there's still a chance that you'll be selected if one of the original selections don't respond in time. Looking forward to seeing your reviews (and basses) in action

Hey there Lukas, welcome. Been to Lausanne a few times long ago. Love the place - so placid sitting next to the lake. Have fun and do join in with the discussions - and by the way, there's nothing wrong with your grammar that I can see so far! There are a few church players around - mine does a lot of the Hillsong/Worship Central type stuff too. Cheers. Trevor

I like a Shure Beta 57 over a 58. Used that in a covers band for many years. I'm sure that I read somewhere that it has a slightly warmer tone than a 58 and is considered quite flattering for female vocals (tending to warm them up a bit). That said I can't recall where I read that and it could have been something my fevered mind made up! :-)

Surely this all comes down to the physics of electronic distortion? This is super oversimplifying the process but... A fuzz pedal puts lots of clipped harmonics and overtones into the signal/sound. Some of these sound pleasant to the ear, some sound unpleasant. Guitar and bass speakers tend to be designed to filter out the less nice frequencies (initially by accident rather than design). That sweetens the sound up. A straight DI (either from a DI box or out of the back of your amp) doesn't do this. You get the bad and the good. Or at least much more of the bad. Put that through a high fidelity system like a PA and you get loads of the nasty right up, in your face! Fizz city! So that is why products like Sansamp and Palmer include speaker simulators in their DI boxes so that you can get a sound more like going through a bass Amp and speaker - and which filter out the less pleasant sounding harmonics and overtones. It's the same reason you barely see electric guitarists going DI, much of their sound is predicated on the taming effect which a guitar amp speaker has on the distorted sound. A DI from a guitar amp would sound horrendously fizzy when using distortion or overdrive. Might be worth investing in a speaker sim. At our church I run straight into the PA and, even without using any distortion I much prefer the sound of a speaker sim preamp. I use a Tech 21 VT Bass DI. Does that explanation make sense?

[quote name='fleabag' timestamp='1441800968' post='2861862'] Vintage = Low-Fi Modern = Hi-Fi I'm partial to something inbetween. Mid-Fi [/quote] I'm not sure which I prefer and the reasons for that preference... Why-Fi

That's really not my kinda bass. But as not my kinda basses go that's one really really lovely not my kinda bass!!! Hmmmm... Starting to get seriously tempted by this brand!