chris_b

It would be helpful if the post could be replaced by a one liner to say that "the post has been removed because it breached the rules". Just disappearing the post isn't really the most helpful course of action.

If you're looking for a bass to gig then don't get a vintage anything. Get the one that plays the best and sounds how you want it to sound and you don't mind getting knocked over on a tight stage. I've seen videos of top US session players talking about their gear and they will aim to take about 6 basses to a session and let the producer choose. They all seem to include a late 50's or early 60's P bass with very old flats. That kind of detail gets noticed on a recording session but won't notice much anywhere else. Several long time Fender players switched to gigging with Lakland basses, Duck Dunn, George Porter Jr, David Hood etc. That would be my direction of thought. If you just have to own an old bass just be aware that Leo Fender could put out a turkey and regularly did. There are a lot of myths around Fender basses old and new, so don't believe any "experts" on the internet. There have been good and bad Fenders in all eras. For investment purposes just buy the oldest, cleanest Fender bass you can find, put it under the bed, because it's an investment, and start looking for that Lakland.

I'm currently playing about half a dozen but at some stage have played 21 of this "top 50" list. These numbers always go down well with audiences. Which is the whole point in a covers band.

Everyone can do without a bad drummer, but IMO nothing can beat being in a band with a good one. 99% of the drummers I've played with over the last 30 years have been good and a pleasure to play with.

One band briefly played Springsteen's Santa Clause Is Coming To Town and another played Chuck Berry's Run Run Rudolph. Apart from those I've never played any Christmas songs.

[quote name='CamdenRob' timestamp='1449223245' post='2921629'] I'm very glad no-one has seen fit to youtube some of the worst ones [/quote] A guy I know just had a shocker of a gig and at one point felt he had to ask the audience not to put the videos up on YouTube. The bad gigs were never seen by most people and the memories used to be relegated to threads like this, now they are pasted all over the internet and that's not good.

Jack Bruce [i]was[/i] an uber-widdler, and to absolutely great effect in Cream. He was the defining musician in that band. Without him, his playing, singing and songs they'd have just been yet another blues band. Having said that, Jack Bruce is the wrong person to base being a bass player on. His playing situations were unique and mostly he was in his own band, probably because he didn't work too well being told what to do in someone else's band.

I'm sure I've done some gigs that would qualify. It's a good job my anonymity remains intact.

Hold your nerve. The band [i]will[/i] sound different and maybe even "wrong", but if you work through the acclimatisation period it will sound better in the end. Don't panic and try to plug the holes or make it sound like the old band. It isn't that band any more. Good luck.

Becoming the only lead instrument is a big change. I hope the "second" guitarist can step up enough to "front" the band. Good Luck. It sounds like you made the right decision anyway.

Over the years I've mostly played in trios and all you need to do is get a good sound and play your bass lines. In one of my bands the guitarist can stop playing altogether when he's singing. We just carry on as bass and drums until he comes back in. Nothing is "missing" when that happens. Don't think you have to "fill in" and/or compensate for a "missing" instrument. It's just a different sound and feel, uncluttered and dynamic, I love it. Learn about "light and shade". The bass and drums is a layer and the guitar and voice are other layers. As long as you keep your layer "together" it doesn't matter what the others are doing or even if they are there or not.

You don't need to change your sound so use your current tone and turn up a little. You don't need to play any more notes. You're not compensating for anything. The band won't sound as "full" but that will be a good thing. Be solid, enjoy the spaces and embrace being clearly heard.

I don't. I've never owned a pedal. Am I missing something?

Same for my amps. The TH500 works perfectly with my Bergantino cabs but doesn't sound so good with the Barefaced cabs. The Thunderfunk works really well with any cab I've owned. If the Subway can outperform either of those amps with both sets of cabs then it's on the Wanted List.

[quote name='cameltoe' timestamp='1448715029' post='2917596'] If I hadn't have moved to floating thumb i'd still be struggling with the anchor-and-stretch. [/quote] What ever works for you. That might work for the OP but I'm just saying, trying to learn 2 things at the same time makes both more difficult. My Luddite view is that everyone who has recorded octave type bass lines in the last 60 years has not used floating thumb, so that technique is not a pre requisite for playing octaves. Here is Roscoe Beck with an octave bass line that will stretch most players, and he's using the standard moving-fixed-thumb style. [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSU5NoqnK1E"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSU5NoqnK1E[/url]

Don't get hung up on floating thumb. Learn one thing at a time. Just practice every song you can find with octave jumps. That'll be a lot of Disco, I'm afraid, but you need to accurately jump up to the octave in many genres. You can use the index finger for the lower note and the middle finger for the higher note. Rock your hand (and wrist) to help reach the notes. I find a fixed thumb helps doing this. More numbers with octaves and 2 string jumps; Car Wash by Rose Royce and Don't Leave Me This Way by Thelma Houston.

I also don't bother with watts. I just get more than "enough" and use the volume controls to bring the volume down to what I need. My 500 and 630 watt amps are running at between 30% and 50% on the volume controls. My thoughts were that anyone only needing a 200 watt amp must actually only be using 100 watts. If you want 200 watts and that's the ball park I'm in, you need 400 ish, so the available 500 watt amps are a good fit for a loud, clean, and fat sound. My Barefaced cabs seem to convert watts into SPL very efficiently and a 300 watt amp might be a good fit with them, but I don't buy amps for particular cabs.

There are a couple of Aguilar TH500's in the For Sale section. Mine sounds great in all my bands.

Phil, I'm not disagreeing with you. But some people seem to be questioning the use of more powerful amps and observing you don't need more than 200 watts. My view is that if I was using 200 watts I'd have a 500 watt amp just ticking over and not a 200 watt amp running flat out.

[quote name='Phil Starr' timestamp='1448556735' post='2916454'] 200W through a decently efficient but unexceptional speaker will give you 120dB. [/quote] Are you suggesting that is 200w out of a 200w amp?

[quote name='ubit' timestamp='1448520443' post='2916037'] I was reminded today about a band that I wish I'd seen called Fanny, purely because I would have loved a tour t shirt! [/quote] I saw Fanny at Brunel Uni. They had a couple of good covers like Ain't That Peculiar, but apart from that they really weren't worth the bus fare. Sadly, I gave up a Zoot Money gig to see them.

[quote name='Davo-London' timestamp='1448449714' post='2915462'] . . . there is something else going on. [/quote] I'd agree. Sounds like technique related more than strings or even set up.

. . . . got it. . . . and Rock Of Ages, which I prefer.

There were a few bands I should have made more of an effort to see, The Who, Bowie, The Move etc, but I didn't, I guess because I wasn't interested enough in them at the time. I saw many of the bands listed above and many more. I've seen most of the bands in my record collection, with the exception of The Band. I'm sorry I missed those guys.