mikel

I use Alpine Musicsafe Pro. Three levels of attenuation. I have tinnitus so I use them for every rehearsal and gig. 3 years use and no problems with them.They cut volume but leave the sound spectrum pretty much intact to my ears. I would recommend them to anyone.

Cheers mate, I admire short and too the point.

Cheers guys, I knew BC would come up with the goods. Respect. Just one thing. How important is the quality of the audio interface? As I say I have a Zoom H4, will that be ok with reaper?

Perfect songs? Olivers Army by Elvis Costello. Great melody, clever but meaningful lyrics, and a wonderful tension builder to come out of the middle 8. Bliss. In My Life, by the Beatles. Just a beautiful, beautiful song, perfectly put together, wistful and poignant. And those harmonies to die for.

[quote name='bazztard' timestamp='1492064188' post='3277521'] yep, Reaper is the bees knees, only Cubase has more users and it's over ten times the price. Reaper is $60, for at least two or three years, maybe more, a licence lasts for two full versions. Fully tweakable. Fully featured. Top quality. [b]Oh, and probably the best feature for new users?, an awesome forum full of helpful people and lots of free tutorial vids too.[/b] [/quote] Oops. Red face. I have never scrolled that far down the menu list before. Thanks for that.

I have a Zoom H4N hand held recorder and I believe it can be used as a recording interface between vocal/instruments and computer recording. Can anyone recommend decent cheap recording software, such as Cubase or similar. There are lots listed on music websites but the prices vary so much and I have no idea what they all do.Can you help a digital recording newbie please? I only need some basic recording software.

Nice one, even without the opp. Back in the day, when I was a drummer, my then 17 year old brother was asked to learn our set list. All originals. The bassist had walked two weeks before a gig. My brother nailed every one of the 23 songs, in the first week, by learning them from a cassette tape we knocked out at a previous rehearsal. If you think how "variable" the playback speed and quality of a cassette back then, I am still impressed today. He did all that in one week so we could rehearse before the gig, with no charts, no tab, they were all originals, on a borrowed bass and rig.

When the band splits cos of musical differences.

When you have a toilet to change in.

[quote name='cheddatom' timestamp='1491908372' post='3276319'] It's fair enough to say "you should be able to play on anything" etc. and that is a valuable skill,[b] but I wonder how many of you would be happy to be forced to play a "house bass"[/b] As has been said, fair enough for a jam, not really fair enough if you're supposed to be putting on a professional performance for which you're being paid. [/quote] This point has been brought up on lots of drum forums, "Why just us?". Because drums take up a lot of space and take a lot of setting up and mic placement. Most drummers accept it if its the only option. I have had to use lots of "House" gear, not a bass guitar, that is just silly, but amps etc. If you want to play the gig, it is what it is, sometimes. Usually its the headliners kit when its a kit share, and I doubt any headline act would have a damaged kit/poor mounts etc.

[quote name='ahpook' timestamp='1491904697' post='3276274'] What, you want another bass kit sharing thread ? Really ? [/quote] Ha. Didnt say that, but I am not about to get into a guitar amp discussion on a bass forum. If I want to talk drums I go to the drum forums.

Yep, done this twice. First time we filled in like crazy to make up the difference and it was ok. Second time we left it like it was and left some space in the music, like Free did, and it sounded great. I am no longer afraid of the spaces in music. Sometimes it sounds better and grooves more.

I play drums as well as bass and If its multiple bands a kit share makes sense. Its no good moaning about tuning etc cos we all have our preferred sound. I have done it a few times and play the kit as it is, with my own cymbals. I dont even adjust the stands just change the cymbals in case of breakages. I make a point of sometimes using the studio kits at rehearsals as It makes you work to play a strange kit. After a couple of songs I dont even notice. As Buddy Ritch told a drummer who tried to adjust Buddies kit "Play is as it lays". Its a good learning experience, not Ideal but it happens, so get used to it. Why is this on here though, I feel sure its a Bass forum?

Poor little mite, that's bordering on abuse.

I think this thread should have been titled "Whats left to do when you have health problems" as most of the reasons for not doing stuff, so far, seem to relate more to that as being an issue. I am 65, fit and healthy and I can pretty much do what I did when I was 20, only better. Mostly because I want to. Our keys player is 73 and one of the best I have ever played with, despite his IBS. Age, health issues aside, is just a number and if you really want to do something you pretty much find a way. I know arthritis is trying hard to stop me doing stuff, my family have a history of the condition, but I refuse to be a victim and modified my diet and exercise regime years ago to compensate. I cant run anymore because of knee problems but I can knock out a 100 mile cycle ride most weekends, no problem, and lift weights three times a week so I am fitter now than most 30 year old's. Use it or lose it.

[quote name='grandad' timestamp='1491715941' post='3274897'] I'm guilty too. I make up my own bass-lines to lots of songs. If they fit and sound good to my ears then I'm happy. To be honest, if I find that an original bass-line feels a bit to busy or to fast for my old fingers I'll simplify it rather than make a cock-up. In the old days we used to play a 45 on 78rpm and pick out the bass-line that way. I remember the first tune I worked out - Walk Don't Run by The Ventures. I later discovered my version wasn't quite their version but stuck with it anyway. [/quote] Thats what I like to do, its called creativity. If it fits the feel of the song and takes nothing away from the groove then its fine, as long as its not missing any signature bass parts that "make" the song.

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1491626035' post='3274373'] Cheers, I'd not actually seen this article though I did find one similar after my initial post got me curious, seems like a bit of dogs dinner doesn't it? why use a take where there's a mistake in the vocal line, if stereo meant so little to them why go to all the trouble of using a mish mash of 3 takes? curious [/quote] Obviously "They" didnt, It would be Parlophone who wanted the stereo mix.

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1491578380' post='3274126'] on Please Please Me (the song) in the stereo version Paul starts singing the last verse wrong, but on the Mono version it's correct so they must have used different takes, but[b] the story goes they could only get one run through of Twist and Shout because John's voice had about had it, [/b]so I'm confused, unless they used the single recording of Please Please Me on the mono LP, perhaps some Beatles expert could enlighten me, definitely Mono and Stereo (of sorts) though, Edit, mono sounds the best though (IMO) [/quote] I believe that is correct. Knackered at the end of a long recording session. John with shirt off, one chance to nail it, and nail it they did. Still stands out for me, even today, as one of the best "Live" performances they ever did. Its raw and rough and almost primal in intensity. Still makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up. I was only 11 when I first heard it and it was the first song that made me realise music could make you feel 10 feet tall.

[quote name='Coilte' timestamp='1491570212' post='3274039'] What's the big deal with post counts ..or am I missing something ? Surely the opinion of someone with three posts is as valid as someone with three thousand ? [/quote] Don't be silly.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1491566486' post='3274009'] Both the mono and stereo mixes were done for the original album release, and you could buy the album in Mono or Stereo versions, but the mono mix is the one that George Martin and the band spent the most time on, as this was the way that most people would hear the tracks - on AM mono radio and Dansette-type record players. The stereo mix is a proper stereo mix and not re-processed from a mono mix, like some from that era, but given that it was done in a fraction of the time, plus the fact that the album was recorded by bouncing between two 4-track machines, the scope for stereo was somewhat limited. [/quote] I thought the early albums were recorded/mastered in Mono only?

I find listening to songs a great learning aid. If you know the structure of the song by heart, through repeated listening, it makes learning it so much easier. You can then play the song through, in your head, while playing the bass part. Learn the song not just your part, that way you always know where you are in the music.

It was The Police gig at the Mayfair in Newcastle back in the day that got me into playing drums. The musicians in that band were a magic mix.

Nice one. There is no better "Ear" training than listening to a song you like and working out the bass part for yourself. Its much more satisfying than just looking at a tab or chart.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1491487967' post='3273443'] There's nothing wrong with re-mastering provided that it is being done because there is a new delivery medium to cater for, and it was done from the original mono or stereo mix and not from an existing production master. Each different format (vinyl, compact cassette, 1/4 tape, CD and data compressed download) should have it's own specially created production master that takes into account the strengths and weaknesses of the delivery medium, and not a one size doesn't really fit any attitude towards mastering. There are lots of restrictions on what can be cut to vinyl that simply don't affect digital files, so they shouldn't have to make to with a less than optimum master. [b]BTW as a purist I hope you bought the mono version of the vinyl,[/b] as this is the one that they spent the time mixing. The stereo version was dashed off in an afternoon at the end of the week when the mono mixes had been finished. [/quote] Of course. If the album was an original Mono recording then that's what its supposed to sound like. I am not a purist, but the original recordings sounded just fine to me.