warwickhunt

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmOEwiz5Kxs&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmOEwiz5Kxs...feature=related[/url] Gonna suggest to the band tomorrow that we try this... and I'll sing it!

[quote name='99ster' post='1022564' date='Nov 13 2010, 04:06 PM']Sold for £1K - which is a lot of money - but compared to others amps of that price... The buyer will be a very happy camper for snagging that for what is a bargain price.[/quote] It may well be a bargain but the seller was also lucky that there was that single buyer out there prepared to pay £1000!

re. the attitude of some bar managers. I'm finding the same thing and I wonder if it is just the pressures of running a bar is getting to them, hence their attitude to bands is 'factious' or could it be the actual calibre of bar managers! If you think about it, a few years ago I'd likely as not have dealt with the same manager for years on end when getting bookings/rebookings (generally on first name terms and matey with them) however, now I'm lucky if it's the same manger that is in place 3-6mths after we have booked/played. IMHO the calibre of manager is woeful as it's likely that many good candidates are thinking that the bar trade is a dead-end and likely to failure, hence any old bod is getting the job regardless of experience or attitude... all just my opinion mind!

Ouch! Obviously not the right time of year to be selling.

[u]Which pickups are usually the better ? Barts ? MEC ? etc.[/u] Better... IMHO too subjective and tbh sometimes I think its a load of b0ll0cks! People talk about this one having slightly more top end or pronounced mids etc but then you've got to take into consideration that your strings will have more effect on the tone than any subtle nuances of the pups. All you have to do is consider the tone that your bass has with brand new strings on and what do they sound like a week later... very different and yet people want to discuss the finer points of MEC v EMG! For me just a bit smoke and mirrors and as to my preference; I like Barts... because the moulding of the plastic corners are dead rounded and comfy for my thumb placement. As to what was on which Warwick bass - The earliest Warwicks came with EMG, Bartolini, Seymour Duncan, that pretty much covered it until MECs were an option (around the time the Spector licensing became a problem for EMG) and then when Warwick bought the company that made MEC, then MEC pretty much became standard, other than on some of the soapbar equipped basses and you could still request/get EMG Bart SD etc. [u]Which time frame has the slimmer necks ?[/u] The earlier the skinnier. Get a NT from 82 - 87(ish) and it'll be uber slim from then till early 90's they were still slim (the bass of mine that you tried was IIRC a 91 bass) but had a bit more depth to the profile. After the volute was added in the mid 90's (coincidentally around the time Warwick moved production premises and increased output inc' adding the various BO neck basses) the neck profiles started changing and it gets very confusing because you had loads of new models and ranges which all differed to some degree. The change of neck material to Ovankol also heralded modifications in profiles. [u]Do the older ones need that wood treatment lark ? Weren't they just waxed or something ??[/u] Hand on heart I've literally only just now used up the original tin of wax that I got with a bass 20 years ago and that has treat upwards of 50 Warwick basses! The waxed basses do not need masses of treatment; when you change strings a quick wipe down with a wax impregnated cloth (use the same cloth for years and it literally retains enough polish that you don't need to open the tin) and a buff and Bob's your uncle. That rule pretty much applies whether you change your strings once a month or once a year. Some unlaquered basses that have a colour treatment (they look natural/waxed) have in fact got a treatment that requires no waxing and you just wipe them down as you would any bass. [u]What's the difference between Stage I and II ?[/u] With the exception of a couple of Ltd/Special Editions, the difference between SSI and SSII are essentially; the body woods are Cherry or Maple on SSI (Cherry on the earliest 82-87/88) and Afzelia on SSII, SSI has PJ pups SSII has JJ and that the NT construction differs, SSI has the classic visible neck running through the body and the SSI has a front skillet that matches in with the wings and makes the neck through body invisible from the front. There are other visual differences like inlays etc but they are the main differences. With regards to the various nuts and bridges - very early basses had a solid brass nut (no grubscrews or adjustment of any kind) then the brass 'Just-a-nut' (as it was known at the time before being labelled a JAN1) which had 4 adjustable grub screws under each string and was used from mid 80's to early/mid 90's at which time the self-destructing JAN II came out which you adjusted with 2 grub screws, not everyones favourite but it didn't do itself any design favours by having sharp edges and self destructing on numerous occasions (which has to be said was as much the operators fault as the nut itself but it should have been more robust to account for those ham fisted owners who altered it without taking tension off the nut), after which came the JAN III. The bridge started out as the Schaller 3D unit then in about 87/88 (there are so many transitions at this time that it's possible to get all sorts of permutations of features and fittings and you can't be exact about each change as they were so variable/flexible) they changed to a 2 piece bridge which was slightly slimmer than the units a couple years later which were a different alloy. At the same time that the bridges were changing in 87/88, they were also changing from a predominantly Wenge neck with slim maple (?) stringers which had been on the early basses to a predominantly Maple neck with Wenge stringers. You can hear a difference in tone if you get two basses from this era and one has the early neck and one the later; the early almost all Wenge neck is certainly 'woodier' sounding (all things being equal with pups and strings).

[quote name='bigthumb' post='1019481' date='Nov 10 2010, 10:54 PM'][attachment=63671:DSCF3214.jpg][/quote] Yes there's something particularly appealing about that Streamer!

[quote name='Lfalex v1.1' post='1019179' date='Nov 10 2010, 06:54 PM']Quadruple post! Is that some sort of a record?![/quote] No

[quote name='Lfalex v1.1' post='1019179' date='Nov 10 2010, 06:54 PM']Quadruple post! Is that some sort of a record?![/quote] No

[quote name='Lfalex v1.1' post='1019179' date='Nov 10 2010, 06:54 PM']Quadruple post! Is that some sort of a record?![/quote] No

[quote name='Lfalex v1.1' post='1019179' date='Nov 10 2010, 06:54 PM']Quadruple post! Is that some sort of a record?![/quote] No

[quote name='Lfalex v1.1' post='1019179' date='Nov 10 2010, 06:54 PM']Quadruple post! Is that some sort of a record?![/quote] No

I assume they've just scrapped all the previous reviews... if so what a chuffin waste!

[quote name='Doctor J' post='1018011' date='Nov 9 2010, 07:23 PM']Yes I do. Nice one. I will pick that up at some point.[/quote] Try youtube and look up anything from that album, try and click a link that doesn't look like a live shot... listen to cr4ppy live 'home-recordings' after you've had the chance to listen to the proper studio tracks. 'He's a whore' is my phone ring tone! Side 1 1. "ELO Kiddies" 2. "Daddy Should Have Stayed in High School" 3. "Taxman, Mr. Thief" 4. "Cry, Cry" 5. "Oh, Candy" Side 2 1. "Hot Love" 2. "Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Peace" 3. "He's a Whore" 4. "Mandocello" 5. "The Ballad of T.V. Violence (I'm Not the Only Boy)"

My all time fave band, ever since 'accidentally' hearing the first album back in 77/78... I was blown away and despite not loving them during certain periods of their career (mid 80's), I would still proudly shout out that I'm an avid Cheap Trick fan. As to what to listen to; if you like your pop rock a bit rawer, I'd suggest the first album (the 77 self titled album not the 90's one) or for the definitive Cheap Trick try 'In Color' or 'Heaven Tonight'. I'm sure that you could get that pairing of albums on a nice price deal in HMV.

Controls are fairly straight forward Vol/Pan and Bass/Treble. The nearest pot to the strings pulls for passive and the bottom pot pulls to cut one of the coils in the humbucker.

I got my first Warwick (SSI) 20+ years ago and despite having had a silly amount of basses pass through my hands (both Warwick and non-Warwick) I still retain that first SSI (despite it going on 'holiday' for a while ) and could never imagine that I'd not have a Warwick of some sort... likely a Streamer! As to whether they are fashionable; to some they never went out of fashion but at the moment they are certainly as cheap as they have ever been.

[quote name='casapete' post='1016077' date='Nov 8 2010, 10:01 AM']To me it sounded like EC was hitting the open top string, which was clashing a bit somewhere. Song is in A, he was capoed on 2nd fret and playing in open G, which meant the dodgy open string was a 6th (F#) which was interfering with the 7th feel of the song somewhat? And also the raised 6th (F) appearing in the riff didn't help either? ( Cluster of F/F#/G's etc.) This is not apparent in the studio recording. Or am I just talking bol*ocks ? (again...!!) Nice Les Paul though![/quote] Your explanation may well fit but it could be as simple as his capo knocking the tuning of his guitar all to c0ck... explaining the look on the various band members faces!

Learning the 'CoF' means that you can easier transpose songs to different keys and when learning new material (covers) or writing new songs (assuming you want to retain a traditional melodic Western Hemisphere feel), you can quicker establish the chord sequence/structures.