Beedster

[quote name='Ed_S' timestamp='1334992406' post='1624388'] I didn't mind the Bass V-amp Pro for what it was, but it was always a poor relation to my Bass Pod XT, which in turn became a close second to my Pod X3 Pro. And I still wouldn't gig the X3 Pro over and above either of my 'real' preamps (Sansamp RBI / BBE Bmax). I guess what I'm saying is that I'm not exactly a naysayer (even though mine just stopped working) but certainly not a fan, and I'd advise you to at least spend the extra 60 quid on a second hand Bass Pod XT Pro from the 'bay. To answer your question directly, however, maybe a Behringer EPQ450 (£150ish new, but bear in mind that the same could get you owen's IPR1600) or maybe a W-Audio Horizon 300 (£120ish new, but I picked up an as-new Horizon 600 for about £90 from that most auspicious of auction sites not long ago, so the bargains are out there to be had). There are even cheaper examples if you really don't need a lot of power; the KAM range that the lad from Gear4DJs is doing special BC offers on goes right down to the £89ish mark, but there's a whole load of getting what you pay for to be considered, and I'd really urge you to do so. [/quote] +1, I run separate power/pre and there are always bargains to be had here and on ebay, largely because the general trend these days is towards small, light and convenient (separates tend to be larger, heavier and therefore less convenient of course). +1 also to JT's comment above

[quote name='4000' timestamp='1334936350' post='1623774'] But they're not openly attacking consumer choice. If you don't like them, buy something else. If you don't feel they're good value for money, move on, as I said before. Also, my favourite Ric is my favourite bass that I've ever played. I've played thousands of basses. So how is the branding "the only substance to an item" in that instance? One thing though, about the cost. Years ago ('80s) I asked a luthier for a quote rebinding a late 70s Ric with checkered binding like the earlier models . I was quoted £300 plus [i]just for the rebinding of the body[/i]. I did the same with the inlays (I wanted full-width crushed pearl) and was quoted more or less the same. Even taking into account that they're having to replace something that's already there, I suspect that if I approached a luthier for a through-neck bass built to the exact same spec as a vintage Ric (assuming I was allowed to ) I'm sure the cost would be pretty considerable. Of course if you had the skill and means to do it yourself (therefore not charging for your time) then that's different, but the majority of people haven't. Personally I'm more baffled by the fact that Fender can charge so much for what is essentially 2 pieces of wood bolted together with one pickup and simple wiring, no binding (a pretty time-consuming job - ask any luthier)and arguably the most simple inlays it's possible to fit, which is not to knock the P Bass, just how much they can cost. [/quote] +1 to all of that. Well put

The Hipshot provides better control over string length and spacing but runs into problems with height (not low enough) and stability (as Bass Doc will confirm, to be fit for purpose they require a 2-3mm shim between the saddles or these can move around a lot). AND......., mirroring the post above, I prefer the sound without the Hipshot, and I have both brass and aluminium versions (although the brass version does seem to add some resonance so I've left it on my 4003FL where it works well for what that bass gets used for). IMO on paper the Ric bridge, like the Fender BBOT before it, shouldn't do the job, but seems to handle it quite well most of the time

Oh and side by side you wouldn't believe the 600 has twice the power of the 300, the latter really holds its own

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1334907486' post='1623162'] Thank you! The Bergs are very sensitive cabs, so I don't feel like I'm running out of steam. Not yet, anyway! The MPulse was a great head, but it just doesn't have the Walkabout's magic mids.... [/quote] You're right WoT, the Walkabout does seem to have something tonally that the 600 lacked. Can't help thinking that Mesa overcomplicated the 600, the EQ/para probably provided too many options and didn't make it simple enough to dial in a tone.

At least he and Rick will put together a decent rhythm section up there. Sad news but a great life and a great human being. The world was a better place for him having been in it for a while C

[quote name='bassmachine2112' timestamp='1334847591' post='1622299'] [u]Hi I think I,ve got it[/u] Rickenbacker has carved a niche for itself in the instrument market.A pretty big niche by all acounts. By running the business as they do they have kept demand for their product high and kept resale values at a premium . They appear to be a small cottage industry with family values of days of yore but underneath is a business heart harder than their fretwire. They do make great instruments which appeal to some and evoque feelings bordering on hatred to others. In short they have a brand loyalty which is enviable.Never in fashion and never out. I have one myself which I,ve had for 13 years now and it,s a great bass. I hope this is what the original thread was about . [/quote] Great post

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334842253' post='1622205'] Don't really know why Fender have been brought into it at all. Whole point is brand is an overrated consideration, and is the main source of the disconnect between price and quality. RIC work the brand thing to the point where it overrides all other considerations. The Fender comparison mostly acts to show what not doing that does, mostly giving people more options, both under and outside of the Fender brand. [/quote] Ah, now I get it, analogous to tech companies then, Apple = Ric, MS = Fender? Makes me even prouder proud to own a RIC In all seriousness you make very good points and probably know far more about it than I do, I just don't think I agree with you C

I think I've kinda lost sight of what the original discussion actually was, but is Ric's QC as bad as Fender's, or is there simply a wide variability in sound etc from Rics (i.e., do they tend to build each the same but due to the vagaries of wood they sound different, or do they realy build each insturment differently)? Personally as I said above, I have found far worse QC with Fender than with Ric. Also, surely the massive scale -and therefore more automated processes - of Fender should reduce issues not increase them?

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334838638' post='1622120'] Can get bodies and necks, that does it. [/quote] So you're saying that any crap QC at Fender is OK because if you get a crap part (e.g., neck pocket) you can replace it with aftermarket one from another company (e.g., a Warmoth body) Think we're having different arguments actually mate so ignore the above, there seem to be a lot of converging Ric-based discussions at present on this forum! C

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334835670' post='1622042'] Thing is, they supposedly aren't a large scale manufacturer, they are pulling the 'family owned business' and exclusivity thing. I'm still pressing to cut brand out of the judgement of basses, but the Fender style/attitude makes issues much easier to correct since they let aftermarket parts makers do their thing. [/quote] Pity Leo Quan or Hipshot don't make drop in neck pockets Not sure I agree with you on that, OK Ric aren't at the scale of Fender, but neither are they Wal. Or perhaps I missed your point?

Probably worth mentioning also that my Precisions varies hugely in tone; my 1982 '62RI was so bright and zingy (with endless sustain) that no matter what strings i has on it, I found it entirely unsuitable for the music I was playing; my '73 was dark and thumpy with virtually no highs and no sustain; my '64 was sweet as can be imagined but - bizarrely - sounded not unlike my present Ric v63 (the Ric is slightly more scooped with both PUPs wide open); and my '79 was very clanky, very JJB. Same with 'rays, my 1980 sounded like a Precision, my 2006 like a Jazz; I could, as you know, go on.....

Have to say that as someone who has owned over twenty Fender Precisions in his time, all the issues regarding QC and inconsistency of Rics are equally applicable to those instrument; some rang out, some had no sustain or ring at all; some had dead spots, some didn't; some weighed over 5kgs, some considerably less. These things are to a certain extent a function of the unpredictable qualities of the raw materials used so are forgivable. Not forgivable though are those on which, for example the neck and the bridge simply hadn't been aligned so the strings were nowhere near the pole pieces, and couldn't be got there without modifications to the woodwork (i.e., it wasn't simply a loose pocket), those that required the fitting of an aftermarket bridge with greater saddle/string length adjustment to intone correctly, and those on which, inexplicably, the neck pocked was almost 10% larger than the standard Precision heel (and amazingly Fender still have a problem with oversized pockets even with their highly rated post-2009 models, a cynic would perhaps suggest it's a deliberate design feature as it provides more degrees of freedom for poorly aligned bridges and PUPs?). IMO Ric and Fender share more characteristics than you'd expect; both (until recently) fitted crap bridges to even their most expensive instruments; both rely strongly on legacy instruments (long running lines, reissues etc); both have done little to innovate, Fender following the innovations of those who built copies of their instruments, Ric seemingly refusing to believe that innovation is necessary etc etc Now, I have also owned over ten Stingrays (pre and post EB) and guess what....? OK, at least EBMM innovate and appear to respond to both the market place and to feedback from players to a greater degree than do Fender or Ric, but their QC is still questionable (see the recent thread on here regarding an especially poor example of EBMM QC and customer service in response). i quite literally shredded the skin of my left hand gigging a new 'ray with very poorly finished frets in 2008, I've similarly cut fingers of my right hand on very poorly finished pole pieces (made worse by the fact i often really had to dig in on the G given that the combination of instrument and circuit seem unable to amplify it to the same degree as the other three strings on at least 50% of 'rays). I don't mind Rcs being bashed on tone etc because that's a horses for courses issue, but IME their QC is no worse than any of the other large scale manufacturers.

Good on him, as Skank said, the occasional butter commercial hasn't really maintained his personal cred, but unless he's a lot more savvy than most senior advertising execs, he's looking after the band's legacy here (although it may be that he personally has very little to gain financially from a GStQ number one anyway?)

Guess what.......... As ever, it's a joy as well as a reminder of the old school BC values to deal with Clarky. There is no better bloke on here to deal with. We have decided to set up a high speed expedited uberlink between our bank accounts to save time in future! C

[quote name='thisnameistaken' timestamp='1334773980' post='1621117'] I think that makes Wales officially a part of Yorkshire, according to some old law I'll pretend I read on the internet once. [/quote] Does that mean that the law allowing an Englishman to use a crossbow to shoot a Welshman in the grounds of Hereford Cathedral on a Monday if it's not snowing now extends to Yorkshiremen, I'm confused?

So now the Yorkshire meet-up is going to be in Wales

So the two proposed venues for the Yorkshire event are Canterbury and Bristol. You lot just dream of the Beautiful South don't you

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334748101' post='1620542'] Think quite a lot established now that they aren't made consistently enough to say. [/quote] Made me laugh out loud that post

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1334653394' post='1619043'] Well its not that it wont work, its by how much and in what conditions it works best. There may well be situations where the amount it changes the output in the room and/or on stage are so negligable that carrying the extra kit isnt worth it. There may well be situations where the difference is profound and really great. There may well be situations where the difference is profound and not what is wanted. It may be that it always works as intended and is the best thing ever. No one on here knows which of these is the case, no one has doen any measurement to try and find out, and Auralex (not dissing the company at all here by the way) aren't saying anything other than its the best thing ever and you would be mad not to always be using it. Which is hardly surprising. I'm positive it works to some degree some of the time, almost everyone seems to be of that opinion who has tried it for a while, but the questions still stand. And as for endorsees proving something is worth having, I give you.... [url="http://www.essentialsound.com/wooten-musiccord-pro-power-cord/index.htm"]Mr VW and his amazing Power Lead[/url] So lets not ever let ourselves get carried away wih the hard sell please! (Having said which I own some auralex products so I'm not having a go at the company or its marketing specifically). [/quote] And you did all that without mentioning compression! Spot on mate, especially 'There may well be situations where the difference is profound and not what is wanted.' Te thirst for 'sonic perfection/control/purity' means it may simply not sound so good to the punters. Good, emotionally satisfying sound often sits at the interface of multiple acoustic imperfections after all