Beedster

Which, one way or another, is why we post a vid of ourselves playing EVH, why we start a thread about people who post vids of themselves playing EVH, if why we disagree with someone else who posts in that thread

This is a nice clip

You might want to put a link in a sticky

Yep, reminds me of Michael Douglas and his alleged carcinogenic activities

People just want to feel part of it mate, in the pre-internet/pre-covid days, everyone would gather outside the house or record company or studio, it's just people's way of managing their own stinky poo. I find the easiest way of not getting annoyed by it is to never look at social media, and by the way, I include BBC News 24 in that category, they increasingly report this sort of thing as if it's news "Person does something on internet that annoyed other person"

Absolutely, larger than life, great music, and mostly smiling all the way, they appeared to be both totally in love with the genre whilst often parodying it at the same time. DLR (and we're not talking train lines) was possibly the best front man ever, and EVH was likely the single most heard guitarist of the 80's - Jump, Beat It etc - up against some pretty stiff opposition that decade.

Unless your name was Mr Rubbish Nut

Awful, slots not straight, blank too wide for neck so all slots shifted towards treble side with nut overhanging, G and D slots close to same width.

Mesa Boogie 1516EV Broke my car with one in 2011, lost one to a courier in 2013. Love the hifi tone from a big back ugly box that's only marginally smaller than Luxembourg and has the aesthetics of a Soviet tank regiment

Why are bassists so obsessed with compression?

Exactly my point (more flawed physics I'm sure, there's never a physicist around when you need one is there)

Agree, that was in part the basis of my comment re my old Wal. It's all about energy, the world's most resonant bass can only do so in response to the energy put into it, it's not creating it's own. I get the argument that some instruments might simply soak up that energy resulting in no sustain but also no discernible improvement in other parameters, but is it possible that some basses transfer that energy in a different way, less sustain but a more pronounced envelope?

Well as the OP (A) I’ve found it useful, and without the tendency towards the above format we’d have no need for a bass forum really

But few who have done it as reliably as Eurosender

Did someone say Goblins?

Part of my reason for posting this thread was this: Whether we agree that sustain is desirable in bass playing or not - and I agree that all other things being equal it's better to have it and not use it than vice versa, as long as all other things are indeed equal - there's a definitive sense of 'better instruments sustain more' that posits sustain as a de facto desirable thing. I'm not convinced. There's an argument that better engineered systems (instruments) resonate more in a previous post, but that's perhaps a by-product of some instruments and not a design feature of all; it is an argument that seems to have become widely accepted however. But you could equally argue that better engineered systems should resonate less; most engineers would prefer the latter, especially those that build bridges :) My second Wal fretless, a MK1, was, like all Wals, a wonderfully engineered and crafted instrument, it was a joy to play and had the most amazingly evocative and nasal tone. But it did not sustain at all, it was articulate as flip, really spoke when I played it, and I loved it, because frankly I found it so much easier to play because it didn't sustain. I also wonder - and this is the 'all other things being equal above - whether the absence of sustain added something to the tone and articulateness, and to the amazing ability that bass had to put what I played straight out of my speaker (it was the first bass on which I was ever able to play Rhythm Stick, and it was fretless!). I have a mandolin that doesn't sustain at all, a US made Breedlove, so again a very well built instrument, and one that I love; my previous mandolin would ring out for several seconds comfortably but again was harder to play. I get that in some situations sustain is desirable and in others it's not, but this isn't about that. I've just never bought the idea that sustain is a de facto indicator of quality in the way some people argue it is. Thoughts?

It's how they deal with the bad days that count. This bunch of absolute clown do not appear to have a system for doing so, avoid like the plague

It's generally sound advice with most genres

That's really very good

I always play heavy flats and very high action to deter any guitarist from even trying

Absolutely, my fave Lizzie album

Now on The Yes Album, on evidence to date I certainly prefer Squire's tone and lines to Lee, but still think Rush have the edge overall.....

Fretless (Wal) on Drama?

Assume joking

i had that for a long time Phil, the problem for me was that I can use the J-Retro make the bass sound so bloody perfect and hifi in the living room - in my case I was going for tones that allowed lines by people like Flea to sound good soloed, zingy top and thumpy bottom - that I kinda fell in love with certain settings that simply didn't work in the band. I needed far more mids in the mix than I was using, and my lines were disappearing. A useful exercise for me was listening to some of the recorded bass parts I was playing soloed, and realising for example that a lot of the bottom end I thought I was hearing on the bass part was kick drum, and a lot of the zingy top was coming from places other than the bass - cymbals and guitar I guess. In short the J-Retro was allowing me to get close to a recorded bass tone that didn't exist (does that make sense) There is certainly no problem at all with the J-Retro, it makes it far easier to get good live sound than either a passive circuit or most active circuits (the mid sweep is very powerful), but it also seduces you with lovely solo tones that do not land live.