Count Bassy

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1387274416' post='2310017'] Personally if I was going to do it I'd probably go the other way---rounds on the E/A and flats on the D/G. I think this would give a much better balance of timbre across the instrument. But why not give it a go? It could sound ace. [/quote] Yeah, me too, make the B/E a bit more lively with rounds and the A/D/G a bit less harsh with the flats. Of course there are half rounds to consider, all the different gauges, different materials (as mentioned), and all the different manufacturers. The possibilities would be almost endless if you had the time (and money) to experiment with them all.

[quote name='booboo' timestamp='1387161894' post='2308920'] Is it best to tune intonation at the bridge to the harmonic or the fretted note at the 12th fret? For those of us more likely to be playing mustang sally than portrait of Tracy surely it's the fretted note? [/quote] The point is that you cannot tune the harmonic. The harmonic (at the 12th fret - at the mid point of the string) is always an exact octave above the open string!. If correctly intonated then fretting at the 12th fret is also an exact octave. If the intonation is wrong then the fretted note is out of tune with the harmonic, but it is always the harmonic which is the reference, to which the fretted note should be tuned using the bridge adjustment. If the bridge is way out, say a 10mm, then the harmonic then you'd have to touch the string 5mm beyond the 12th fret to get the true harmonic, but it would still be an exact octave above the open string. If you tried touching the sting directly above the 12th fret in those circumstances then you wouldn't get much of a harmonic.. .

Can't believe that no-ones suggested "Pick up the pieces".

[quote name='KiOgon' timestamp='1386749105' post='2303881'] Sharp is short & flat is long if the harmonic is sharp the string is too short - you need to move the saddle further away from the nut. HTH John [/quote][quote name='KiOgon' timestamp='1386749105' post='2303881'] Sharp is short & flat is long if the harmonic is sharp the string is too short - you need to move the saddle further away from the nut. HTH John [/quote] I'm pretty sure it's the other way round I.e. if the [i]fretted [/i]note is sharp then you move the saddle away from the nut. The whole point is (I thought) that the harmonic at the 12th has to be an exact octave above the open string, irrespective of string length.

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' timestamp='1386971861' post='2307154'] Most tweeters don't do anything below 4kHz, and most players don't have a lot of content in their tone above 6kHz, so getting along without them you don't lose much. What most players can benefit from is better response between 2kHz and 5kHz, where midrange drivers operate. But midrange drivers and their crossovers are more expensive than tweeters, so they're rarely seen. [/quote] Must be why my old Musicman HD212 ( 2 x 12" + 1 x 6") sound so good!

[quote name='Salt on your Bass?' timestamp='1379361635' post='2211853'] Looks great, but 1599 for a class d?? [/quote] £1599 for any amp?!!!

[quote name='Delberthot' timestamp='1386621970' post='2302382'] I used this setup for years and am about to again for larger gigs with PA support although with different amp and cab than the picture to keep the stage volume down [url="http://s927.photobucket.com/user/Delberthot/media/DSC02041Medium.jpg.html"][/url] [/quote] MY only comment on that set up as shown is that, whatever it sound like, it must look pretty awful from the audience's view point if that is directly in front of you.

[quote name='jimbobothy' timestamp='1386522033' post='2300989'] Hey guys, I've been informed that the two speakon inputs that are on each of my cabs are wired in parallel. In usage what does this mean please? E.g. If I daisy chain from one cab to the other what will the overall ohms rating be, 16 ohms? I run a Genz Benz Shuttle 6.0 head at the moment. Cheers, any info would be great [/quote] Two 8 Ohm cabs in parallel will give you 4 Ohms.

[quote name='Lozz196' timestamp='1386420735' post='2299913'] This Marshall DBS7200 (with cab) is a steal at £200 [url="http://basschat.co.uk/topic/223914-marshall-dbs-7200-amp-and-7015-cab/page__hl__dbs__fromsearch__1"]http://basschat.co.u...__fromsearch__1[/url] I had the 7400 and it was a great amp, just too heavy for me. [/quote] I have the DBS7400 and I love it. "Only" 400 Watts (into 2 Ohm), but has a peak of 4000 Watts rather than a more typical 800 for 400W continuous, so sounds far louder than the 400 watts would suggest. My 'small' rig is this into an 8 ohm Vanderkley MNT112, and it's deafening. This beast can drive 4 of these !! and I can't imagine how loud that would be. But ........ It does weigh a ton (and the fan can be noisy for practice purposes). Also, to me the difference between the solid state preamp and the valve pre-amp is not as dramatic as I'd like it, but that might just be a valve change required.

I'm looking for a snow machine for will probably be a one off use at a gig between Christmas and New Year (as possibly once a year thereafter). It will be used in a smallish covered outside area, total audience capacity probably around 60. I'm really only looking to squirt some snow over the band (area of around 5 x 2.5 metres), not over the whole audience. It wouldn't have to be a blizzard, just enough to be seen and raise a smile. However I know absolutely nothing about them!. [size=4]Looking on E-bay they seem to start at around £50 (new), but is something around this price going to worth having at all? What wattage should I be looking for etc?[/size] [size=4]It is going to be a bit off a one off "gimmick" for a laugh, so I wouldn't want to spend too much. £40 would be OK, £70 possible, - beyond that gets hard to justify.[/size] [size=4](If I make the "investment" it will probably snow for real!)[/size] [size=4](I've just seen that, even in a cheap machine, 1 Litre of "snow fluid" only gives about 7 minutes of snow)[/size] [size=4]Thanks in advance.[/size]

[quote name='steve-bbb' timestamp='1386426163' post='2299975'] isopropyl alcohol or lighter fluid also a rag soaked in IPA and rub down strings will really clean them up and give them a fresh lease of life [/quote] And the orange oil based solvents (e.g. label remover) are great for gaffa tape residue as well (and Blue Tac residue). However, as they always say, "test on an inconspicuous area first".

[quote name='Mottlefeeder' timestamp='1386320432' post='2298617'] Thanks for your input - I agree with the theory, but the rig will not be delivering continuous power. There is an article on the EBS site about power requirements for bass amplifiers which states that the ratio between the peak signal of a plucked string and the average of the note is about 12:1, so you need the 100W for the first few vibrations of the string, and much less for the rest. [/quote] This is why the old Marshall DBS7400 is so good - a nominal 400W amplifier with a peak of 4000W. A 10:1 ratio rather than the more typical 2:1. (but it weighs a ton).

So, can I sell a cab without a speaker lead? - after all it's pretty useless without one. - and how long should said speaker (or indeed mains) lead be?

[quote name='FinnDave' timestamp='1385896040' post='2293196'] We had a request for a Doors song (forget which one) a week or two ago, told him we didn't do requests. He then said 'But I wanted to buy the band a drink', so we changed our principles and gave him Roadhouse Blues (which was on the set list anyway). Principles are all very well, but a simple bribe usually overrules them! [/quote] Reminds me of the Groucho Marks thing, something along the lines of: "These are my principles. If you don't like them don't worry, I have others" Sadly, to my ear, the Doors' version of Roadhouse Blues is about the worst there is, even though they wrote it. The Jeff Healey version is one of my favourites (and in our current set list)

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1386163503' post='2296565'] Imagine you go around to a mate's house to check out his new rig. He plays a bit, you play a bit, he plays a bit more, you play a bit more and it breaks. Is that your fault or would it have broken no matter who was playing it? Gear can fail, we all know that and it's not always the fault of the person who happens to be using it at the time. Would you be prepared to pay to fix a venue's PA system if it failed while you were using it? [/quote] A very good parallel, what I was sort of trying to get at with the Cymbal analogy, but the house PA is a far better on. [size=4]Similarly if you borrow someone's car for a 10 mile trip and the engine blows up, are you obliged to pay for a new engine and fitting?[/size] [size=4](If you answer yes to this then please feel free to borrow my car any time you like!)[/size]

The problem with some of these situations is that you can never be sure that it wasn't on the point of failing anyway, or whether it was specific overload that caused the problems. You may think it was a specific case of abuse, the other bloke may claim, and believe, that it was "obviously" on its last legs anyway. Particularly relevant with cymbals, which is why drummers always (or should) take their own breakables. A cymbal can look absolutely fine and yet be be work hardened to the point imminent failure. If you lend a cymbal to someone and it cracks can you really blame the borrower? I know that cymbals are not necessarily a good comparison because by their nature they will always break eventually, whereas (I guess) a speaker could go on indefinitely.

[quote name='ambient' timestamp='1385132775' post='2284842'] Kind of disagree, you can be learning scales, fingerboard notes, chords, triads etc, at the same time as learning songs, you don't have to do the things as separate parts. Personally I'd prefer to learn to paint, than just be told that this colour goes there and this one here etc, painting by numbers analogy again, sorry . [/quote] Just to point out that I'm not saying don't do the theory, or that you don't need to (It's certainly transformed my playing!). All I'm saying is that these sort of sites, and tabs, have their place as well. If they allow a few people to get started on the bass without being frightened off by theory then I'm not going to knock them, however the sites themselves shouldn't suggest that theory doesn't help! Personally I've not used one of these sites, and only used tabs once to try and crack a bit I couldn't work out by ear.

[quote name='louisthebass' timestamp='1385108697' post='2284475'] Not sure which website it is you're referring to, but this is my 2p's worth; I don't think it hurts to know your Major, Minor, Major Pentatonic and Minor Pentatonic scales. To me, they're the Lego Bricks of 99% of Rock, Pop, Blues, Country and any other mainstream type of music that the general public listen to. Your chord tones come from your Major and Minor scales, and they are the things you need most in order to function as a bass player in a band. The other notes in the scale add harmonic interest if you choose to use them in your bass playing. [/quote] I agree with what you're saying, but I also believe that these sort of websites also have a place. After all what's the difference between learning from this type of website and learning something from Tabs? When you're just starting out you want to play a tune, not spend weeks learning scales, and if your told you have to learn scales first then the chances are you'll get demoralised and not get beyond those first few weeks. PS: Sounds a bit like Paul Wolf's "How to play Bass" website

[quote name='JamesBass' timestamp='1385048080' post='2283840'] Well that would surely just depend on the music written, would The Beatles have sounded so fantastic on a Solid State? Would John Entwistle have sounded as good with SS? Etc. Personally I don't think so, the valves allowed for the amp to become something much more than what SS has, in my opinion of course. I much prefer the warm, tone and all round feel of an all valve head. Obviously cabs play a HUGE part as does the guy or gal on the bass! [/quote] [size=4]Well, they would have sounded different, and as that is how we would have first heard it we would probably have thought it sounded great. All I'm saying is that perceptions depend very much on what you're used to, and what you heard first. [/size][size=4]Same sort of thing with Vinyl and CD: If CD had come first would anyone be singing the praises of vinyl, with its poor fidelity and [/size][size=4]susceptibility[/size][size=4] to damage? [/size] [size=4]The all valve Amps I have played through and heard generally sound great, but to me it is like having a built in effect that you can't bypass. [/size]

[quote name='Jazzneck' timestamp='1384963727' post='2282868'] GEEEEEEEZ - how old are you? [/quote] Too old by far! [quote name='Jazzneck' timestamp='1384963727' post='2282868'] Have you ever used a valve head through a good cabinet at a gig with a smokin' band? [/quote] Yes, used an enormous Ampeg head, through an Ampeg 8x10, and it sounded great. All I'm saying is that that sound probably bore little resemblance to the "Sound" coming out of the bass. Of course this is true of most amps & cabs, otherwise they'd all sound the same, and what fun would that be? However valve amps seem to try and make feature out of a fundamental flaw. If clean solid state amps had come first, and valve amps had been a later development people would probably be clamouring for the cleanness of an "old time" solid state amp, and bemoaning the "muddy" sound the new valve amps."

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1384958329' post='2282780'] It's not the "how much", it's the way it does it. There's just so much more ... erm... [i][b]Distortion [/b][/i]in every note you play. [/quote] Fixed it for you! [size=4] [/size] Seriously though, I'm not arguing against Valve amps, but they should they not be regarded as an oversized effects pedal. If you want the amp output to be a true representation of the signal that is leaving your pickups then it's surely got to be solid state all the way. Obviously you spoil the Fidelity by then squirting it into a loudspeaker! (and using a pick-up in the first place) Ducks for cover.

We do Superstition with 1 Guitar, Sax, Bass & drums, though in quite a different style to the original, and the audiences seem to love it (I haven't actually asked them, but they don't throw things).

[quote name='paul h' timestamp='1384495439' post='2277319'] Three times I have started to reply to this and three times I have thought better of it. This is draft number 4. I apologise for the "I'm amazed" comment. Unfortunately that's my opinion. The exciting thing about music for me is that it's constantly developing and changing. I love nothing more than discovering something new. A genre I haven't listened to before. A new artist I admire. A new song that I love. Luckily I'm not alone in this because well...new music is being written all the time. Music that has absorbed all those wonderful influences from a post Mustang Sally world Luckily I'm not alone in this because well...The Beatles, The Beach Boys, Jimi Hendrix, Queen, Funk, Disco, Punk, Hip Hop, Dance Music, The Moog, Drum Machines, Programming, Sampling, DJ's, Mixing...and of course a million other influences that make up modern music. And to answer some of your points directly. The only reason I don't like a song is because I don't like it. It has nothing to do with popularity. I also never said anything about wanting to play obscure songs or thinking obscure means good. And I certainly didn't mention Sex on Fire. And I certainly wouldn't describe it as a classic because I can no more see into the future than the guy who wrote Mustang Sally. [/quote] Paul, I can see that echoing your expression gave the impression that my post was a direct rebuttal of yours, but it wasn't meant to be that. It was more of a general comment on the attitudes of some people here, not aimed at yourself directly. Perhaps I should have put through several drafts before firing it off as you did your reply! I too enjoy discovering new stuff, even if its old stuff that I've only just discovered. However I also like some of the old classics. It doesn't have to be an either or situation, new and old stuff can coexist, neither is inherently good or bad: As you rightly say it comes down to do you like it or not (and, in a band situation, do the audience like it).

[quote name='paul h' timestamp='1384323984' post='2275170'] I will never to cease to be amazed that musicians and bands just can't embrace new music. When I say new, I would actually settle for something written in this decade....or century...or maybe since I've been alive. [/quote] I will never cease to be amazed that musicians and bands can't embrace old standards! There seems to be the attitude that if it's popular and the audience like it then it must be bad!!! Conversely obscurity seems to be taken as automatically meaning a song is good. Songs that are obscure are generally obscure for a reason, songs that are still being sung and enjoyed are being so for a reason. I have nothing against modern "Classics", but will "Sex on Fire" still be being sung in 40 years? Mustang Sally is often regarded with scorn in these pages, but its a good song that is still being sung and enjoyed 40 years after it was written! As far as I'm concerned that must mean it must have something right. I wish I had written it!!

[quote name='Musky' timestamp='1383471427' post='2264681'] Why? Because these things weren't always valuable and some people like to modify instruments. [/quote] Exactly!