Annoying Twit

I appreciate people doing something a bit different, and I like a lot of Jens Ritter's instruments. However, don't think either the above instrument's finish, or the following instrument's finish, does it for me. I'm also not sure about this blue fretboard look, but I could imagine more people liking this than the above two. Not that I would want to discourage anyone from trying anything different, I'm sure that there are people who would love any one of these.

Is this the UK brand that used to sell inexpensive instruments? Or, is it an older, possibly japanese, brand from the past?

OIC. Thanks.

[quote name='Grangur' timestamp='1439062596' post='2839763'] [url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Custom-Bass-Guitar-Stored-at-Felixstowe-/252048837875?hash=item3aaf480cf3"]http://www.ebay.co.u...=item3aaf480cf3[/url] Here's one that the owner thinks is an Ibanez. Is it an Ibanez, do you think? [/quote] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPxbQ2Z7NYY[/media] [quote name='Grangur' timestamp='1439062553' post='2839762'] One can only guess what happened to the TR when the drill hit it. [/quote] It looks a bit as if the owner let it be used at a kids party in a bass modification version of 'pin the tail on the donkey'.

Avon bass repair project. It didn't look too bad until I saw the big gaping hole in the back of the neck where I presume a strap lock was added. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Avon-SG-Bass-Made-in-Japan-1970s-for-spares-repair-project-/311420157838?hash=item4882167f8e

[quote name='Dan Dare' timestamp='1438893448' post='2838550'] Probably, but I still like it because of what it meant to me at that stage of my life and the happy memories it represents . Pop music, as dear old Frank Zappa said,[b]is music to dress up to[/b]. It doesn't matter if it's high art or not. [/quote] Here's what Zappa thought of Sgt. Pepper's It's said that Zappa/Mother's album Freak Out was an influence on Sgt. Pepper's. In that McCartney heard it and asked the band whether they could do something similar. Sgt. Pepper's is probably The Beatles most important album, though a good case can be made for Revolver. In my opinion, Abbey Road is their best album.

More dekos. Including a black left handed acoustic bass. http://www.thomann.de/gb/harley_benton_b_30bk_lh_deko.htm More expensive than the RH version. Seems a bit unfair.

I would guess that those steel on silk strings mentioned in a thread on uke basses would give a reasonable tension tuned to EADG, as the uke bass they were on had a similar scale length. Personally I do think it's interesting, but don't want to buy it myself. EDIT: Pyramid copper wound strings on a silk core, which are reported to work on a kala u-bass.

Some acoustics just went up. E.g. http://www.thomann.de/gb/harley_benton_cg200ce_bk_deko.htm

[quote name='Tweedledum' timestamp='1438977825' post='2839208'] It's smaller than the H.B. Kahuna, which is more like a 1/2 scale guitar, as I understand. The J&D is similar to a Kala UBass. Soundwise, i don't know. I never played a Kala. The J&D has a B-Band pickup, if that counts for something. As I wrote, I'll pick it up tomorrow and will share my impressions. [/quote] Thanks. I'll look forward to your review.

They're not all perfect. My acoustic has some finish flaws. Peering at your photo, I think it is just a lacquer crack. If it is deeper, and you've just received it, don't forget that you can return it if you want. On the other hand, there's this video: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQw3BRQnLPU[/media]

[quote name='Ghost_Bass' timestamp='1438867954' post='2838229'] From a quick google search it does seem like it. It sounds very well and certainly isn't a toy. Typical Yamaha quality, cheap and very decent. It stays in tune and is loud enough to keep up with vocals (everything unplugged). I believe they payed around 80€ for each so it's a nice bargain. [/quote] Thanks. I actually saw one on ... Wednesday I think ... in a Yamaha store in Soho. If I remember correctly, they were selling them for £58, which seems a very fair price. The strings on the demo version were a bit rusty. @Tweedledum - be interesting to hear what the J&D sounds like, how big it is, etc.

I don't think we're ever going to find out why these instruments are described as 'dekos'. Back to watching the list to see what turns up. Interesting to note that there is now some form of acoustic bass available pretty much all the time, and as mentioned the progressive basses are frequently available. I don't think I've seen the uke basses hang around for this much time before. I can't be bothered trawling through my log files to check, however

[quote name='hiram.k.hackenbacker' timestamp='1438816875' post='2837754'] Just out of interest, where do the regulations sit regarding this?.... "Return Policy - Goods (except for custom made instruments) can be returned within 7 days of delivery. The amount paid will be refunded minus a 15% handling fee. It is not possible to return custom made instruments." [/quote] It is not legal to charge a 15% handling fee for anything returned under the CCRs. The refund must be all of the costs (including delivery) that were originally charged. Unless the goods have been handled more than is necessary for the purposes of evaluation. Custom made instruments cannot be returned under the CCRs. Both of these points are covered here: http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-contracts-regulations

Is that going to have coil taps?

I thought that someone further up had bought a bass from the mobile site that wasn't on the main site.

[quote name='dannybuoy' timestamp='1438790506' post='2837382'] Not quite steel, but these are copper wound on a silk core: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JzF-5k0pog[/media] They also do tapewounds I believe. [/quote] Fair 'nuff. I presume that these are specially designed for use on ukuleles. The amplified sound sounds fine, quite normal. What do they sound like unamplified?

[quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1438795695' post='2837460'] I never claimed it was not within your legal rights... only that it was, well... cheeky, in that situation. I am sure I have at one point or another taken advantage of a situation where I'm not breaking any rule but I'm being cheeky nonetheless. I'm no angel! But I will not try to convince people that I'm not being cheeky about it. That's all. [/quote] Well, cheeky is quite different from morally wrong, which is what the previous discussion seemed to imply. (And morally wrong is what another poster has said.) But, I think that a major part of what I have said hasn't been considered in the answers, and this is the role of Thomann in all this. I'll explain. Fundamentally, I may be cheeky if I use the CCRs to return a deko bass, but Thomann have created the whole situation and IMHO have been even cheekier than I have. IMHO, they're playing a game with the dekos, and that makes it IMHO entirely fair, reasonable, and moral to use the CCRs as they were intended to be used. Thomann are not a two bit operation, they are run as a business and they know what they are doing. Hence, they know what they are doing when they describe these instruments as being decoration only, not suitable for music even though they aren't. E.g. instruments that are more broken tend to be sold at the flea market where people can examine them in person. If the instruments were all not suitable for playing, then they most likely wouldn't sell at the prices that they are selling at. Look at the start of the deko thread. Everyone assumed that they would have (e.g.) serious neck issues and people such as myself wouldn't touch them with bargepoles. And the same deko instruments stuck around forever. Once word got around that they were OK, they started selling, and now they often sell like hotcakes. Note that this is not just word of mouth outside Thomann's control, some dekos have reviews posted, saying that there was pretty much nothing wrong with them. Note also that Thomann vet all reviews before they go up (which is why reviews often take some days to be posted.) Now consider that Thomann say 'without warranty, without money back'. Read literally, this is misleading consumers as to their rights (though I'm not sure this is what they mean), as while their wording will remove rights under the sale of goods act (and/or European equivalent law), they can't legally remove buyer's rights to refunds under the CCRs. And because most dekos are fine for playing, Thomann are misdescribing their products. Again, we can ask the question whether it's a bit cheeky for an online seller to misdescribe their products with the intention of reducing consumer rights. People aren't complaining about that because they prices have been reduced as well, but this is clearly a complicated situation. Given that Thomann are themselves being cheeky and playing a consumer rights game, I don't think there is anything immoral in a buyer playing their side of that game, which is to use their CCRs rights which can't be voided by Thomann's word games. (Though, the 'No warranty, no money back' might be interpretable as them attempting to do that. I don't think they would do that, but it does look odd.) I've just seen the analogy of the water seller, and I'll reform that analogy to more closely match the deko situation. First, people aren't complaining when the water described as not fit for human consumption gives them a tummy ache. What people are doing is noticing the cheap water, opening the cap, giving it a good sniff, and deciding to buy the water if it smells OK. The rejected deko isn't a tummy ache, it's more like a situation where someone takes the cap off a bottle of water, finds that this one actually smells of poo, and deciding not to buy it. The 'return' part of the process is because with distance purchases, that's how someone decides not to buy something after they've been able to sniff the water and see if it smells sweet or not. You and others have interpreted the rejection as a 'complaint'. It's not, it's just a decision not to purchase. Because of the mechanics of online/distance purchases, it requires a return as the consumer doesn't get to test the item (sniff the water) until it arrives at their home. Now to continue the analogy, imagine that the water seller has received a review of the water 'even though it says not fit for human consumption, I bought some and it was absolutely fine.' and they have pinned that up in their water shop where people can see it. (Equivalent to Thomann's vetted reviews.) In that case, the seller becomes more culpable if someone does get ill. (Even though I removed the illness from my version of the analogy.) The market for dekos, particularly Thomann's role in it, is more complicated than people are portraying it in this thread, which is creating a lot of straw man arguments and analogies. Also, there was an analogy about basses advertised as having a missing headstock, and then someone returned it because it has a missing headstock. If the bass actually does have a missing headstock, then yes it would be odd to return the bass on that basis. However, that is a very different situation from the market for dekos, as described above. The sale of a bass with a missing headstock is a fair and honest one. The item being sold was described accurately. Thomann aren't describing their items accurately, as well as also not being straightforward in other ways as described above. It's a game, and Thomann are playing it too. They are not blameless innocents in the deko market. EDIT: BTW, I won't be replying to this thread before I get back from London tomorrow. Trying to write answers while on coaches is not only difficult, it's burnt through enough data costs through using my phone as a wifi hotspot, that I probably could have bought one of the cheaper dekos.

[quote name='Grangur' timestamp='1438797567' post='2837484'] Current listings say clearly "Decoration without warranty, without money back" [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/harley_benton_b_450_black_progressiv_deko.htm"]http://www.thomann.d...ressiv_deko.htm[/url] [/quote] Except that the consumer contract regulations state that people can return them. They can avoid comeback through the sale of goods act through wording and pricing, but they can't prevent people returning them.

I like to hear good bass solos. E.g. Jack Bruce on Frank Zappa's track "Apostrophe". There was a youtube video someone posted once of a number of very well known bassist playing what sounded like scales with no real musical payoff (in my subjective opinion). I didn't like that.

@Ghost Bass - do you mean the Yamaha guitarlele? If so, what does it sound like? Youtube videos seem to vary a lot. Surely a bass Uke with steel strings would never work because the scale length would be too short. Wouldn't you need utterly ludicrously high gauge strings to get anything like a reasonable tension? I've seen a ukulele orchestra with a kala bass uke being amplified through a cute little practice amp. Maybe an 8" speaker. In a tent. It sounded fine. It might keep the 'very small instrument' vibe going while being audible. Your question has made me wonder if it's possible to make a tiny upright bass with silicone (or similar) strings. Could a viola be modified to make one by sticking a peg on it? EDIT: I've searched around, and have found no sign of anyone ever creating a silicone stringed mini double bass. I would guess that this means that it simply won't fly as an idea.

[quote name='Andytre' timestamp='1438773371' post='2837064'] There's also one of the beat basses on the Mobile site [url="https://m.thomann.de/gb/harley_benton_beatbass_vs_vintage_se_deko.htm?o=9&ref=mal_a_9&search=1438773262"]https://m.thomann.de...arch=1438773262[/url] [/quote] Tempted by the beatbass ... but not yet. I had previously only played the Epiphone viola bass, and a not very well set up example of the cheapest Hofner version. I played another cheapie Hofher on Monday in a shop that sets up their instruments, and it felt quite decent. But do I need another four string fretted bass? I have some GAS for the HB T-Bird. I don't know why, perhaps because I enjoyed my brief trial of Norris's Gibson T-Bird. I'm not using my deko tracking program this week, as using it at various free wifi locations (e.g. on coaches) with off-again on-again connectivity was too annoying as it would suddenly announce that everything was gone and then announce that it was all back again.

[quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1438781045' post='2837215'] Seriously? They were labeled as unsuitable for playing. Instead of being happy if you take a gamble and find that you can, actually, play many of them, you think it's ok to complain when they don't play... despite them advertising clearly that this is the outcome you should expect. Mindboggling. So I sell bottled water and label it "not for human consumption". 100 people drink it and they are ok. Person 101 gets a upset stomach, and complains... You think they have grounds for complaining? Sure. We're going to have to agree to disagree about this one, my friend. [/quote] I'm not complaining when they don't play, I'm taking advantage of my consumer rights to return the item if I decide I don't want to keep it. That's quite different from complaining. Being able to return an item bought at a distance within the time limit and by the prescribed means without having to have any particular reason is the whole point of the consumer law concerning distance selling, which has even been strengthened recently. If you buy online you can't see exactly what you get until it arrives in the post. If you don't like what you see when you get it, you have the right to return this. This is nothing to do with the product being as described or anything like that, it's just giving the consumer to make the final decision as to whether they want to keep the item or not when they have it in their hands. I have given quite a bit of explanation of why I feel this is an entirely reasonable standpoint. And clearly I'm not alone in thinking this as European law and UK law has been designed specifically to enable consumers to do exactly this. So, if you find that unacceptable, it's more than just me you have a problem with. See e.g. 3:23 in the following document, which is the office of fair trading advice to distance sellers. http://www.detini.gov.uk/distance_selling_guidance.pdf?rev=0 [quote] [list] [*] [size=3]3.23 [/size][font=Univers][size=3]Where the DSRs give consumers the right to cancel an order, this right is unconditional and begins from the moment the contract is concluded. Unlike when buying from a shop, the first time that a consumer will typically have an opportunity to examine goods purchased by distance means is when they receive them. The DSRs give consumers who buy by distance means more rights than consumers who shop in person. When a distance consumer cancels a contract to which the cancellation provisions apply they are entitled to a refund of any money they have paid in relation to the contract even if the goods are not defective in any way. Please also see paragraph 3.46 for further information. [/size][/font] [/list] [/quote] You may find it mind-boggling, but given that the law specifically enables these kind of returns, I don't think they can be claimed to be anything out of the ordinary. EDIT: The above is for the DSRs, not the CCRs. However, the situation is now even more pro-consumer than it was with the new CCRs. I wonder why the old advice is still up on the government site. @bassix - I believe that it does affect your rights if you pick up the item from the seller if you have an opportunity to examine the item before taking it away. I'm not sure that qualifies as distance selling, but it may take a lawyer to give a firm opinion. I have read somewhere that some shops encourage consumers to inspect goods on the premises as it reduces the consumer's rights.

[quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1438770191' post='2837028'] erm... "you win"? hey, if you think it's right to return something that is sold as "not playable" because it wasn't playable... I have nothing to add. You may not be contravening any rules, but you're exploiting a loophole and you know it. You're happy with it? Fine. I wouldn't do that but you live however you want to live [/quote] I wish I had not written my above post at about 4:20am before leaving to catch a coach with no wi-fi, there was no opportunity to rewrite it before it was read and replied to. However, I'll continue on from where the conversation has reached. While Thomann do state that these instruments are not suitable for music, it is widely known that the vast majority of them are perfectly usable for music. E.g. my taking my PJ to a bass bash and challenging people to find something wrong with it. Thomann's disclaimer does not match the facts. It is not, IMHO, unreasonable to expect that a newly purchased deko is more or less of the quality that instruments sold as dekos have been in the recent past. In the seemingly very rare case that a deko actually fit Thomann's disclaimer, then that would be a deko of near or actual unprecedented poor quality. And in that case I see nothing morally wrong with returning the instrument bought online should it not match typical deko quality. Actions speak louder than words, and Thomann's actions are that there is typically hardly anything wrong with them. This makes it a very different situation from a case where Thomann had described the instruments as unsuitable for actual playing and they were actually unsuitable for playing. In which case I would agree with you that it would be strange to buy them and return them if the description fit.

[quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1438721979' post='2836746'] But the dekos were never meant to be playable... the fact that most were was a "bonus". So returning it because it didn't play well is just not right, even if you take advantage of "your rights"... Now phrase it as you wish. [/quote] I do think it's right. In the same way that I can go in and check if any bass guitars in my local shop have lumps of gold stuck in the wood, and not buy them if they don't. And these are my legal rights (no quotes), not "rights" (with what the quotes imply). It's a fundamental precept of online buying that I have the right to return the goods for whatever reason I choose. And there's no way that I'm going to feel bad about doing so. Given that the overwhelming majority of the Deko instruments are playable, and are therefore being mis-described by Thomann, if anyone is sad about people buying dekos and returning them if they aren't playable, Thomann are hardly blameless in that transaction. BTW: You haven't supplied an evidenced counter-argument to what I wrote before, you've just disagreed with me. Hence, I don't need to rephrase anything, I think my previous post still stands.