thodrik

That is the best plan. You never know what you might end up preferring. All the best!

Such an article must surely have occurred after the following exchange at the office: Editor: 'Folks, we are on a tight deadline and we need some bass content urgently. Rob, can you just draw up some kind of list thingy based off your own preconceptions which requires no research whatsoever?' Rob: 'Sure thing boss, I will get right on it after I finish this Pot Noodle.'

I am seriously going to have to try one at some point!

I would concur with this amp. I only sold mine because I found it difficult to dial in my chosen sound at lower volume levels! For some big old MOSFET/Hybrid heft I would also heartily recommend: - EBS Fafner/TD 650 - highly flexible EQ sections, great for all styles of music. I own a Fafner. Very little fan noise or hum compared to Ashdowns I have used (and I have used Ashdown amps a lot over the years and do rate them as well). The only con for me with the EBS, is that I think that they are voiced a bit high and they don't really deliver a lot of big subs compared to a Mesa. In terms of stage sound though this is actually a benefit as your bass sound cuts through. - Mesa Big Block 750. Less sophisticated EQ section compared to the EBS amps or the Mesa M6. It does big rock heft and not really much else. Overdrive channel on it is glorious (way ahead of Darkglass in my opinion and I own the Duality, B3K and Alpha Omega pedals). If you want clean headroom and a 'flat' hi-fi tone look elsewhere though. Tough to find used for sensible prices. - Gallien Krueger RB heads: The RB 700 is a real classic. I really like them. - Fender 800 Pro - big heavy MOSFET sleds but very nice EQ systems. Nobody really bought them so you could probably get one fairly cheap. - old Eden World Tour amps: get one second hand. Pretty uncool these days (about as associated with 1990s as watching old episodes of Friends). Cracking amps though. Will any of the above amps be any better than the Darkglass head? That is subjective. Will the above amps be much heavier and thus automatically give the illusion of additional heft? Absolutely!

Welcome to the board! For light new cabs on budget, have you thought of the Ashdown Rootmaster series? The 4x10 is 46 lbs and RRP £399 The 2x10 is apx 34 lbs and £299 The 1x15 is apx 34 lbs and RRP £289. I tried an Orange iso 2x12. It was heavy for the size (not a surprise given there are two speakers in a box that looks like it only has one) but the tone was good. I didn't think that it had the onstage spread of sound compared to a traditional 2x12. If I was going Orange I would go for the individual 1x12s stacked which by themselves would be enough for most gigs. They are £399 each though so while not Mesa or Bergantino levels of expense I wouldn't consider them to be a budget solution though it would be a very good solution.

Scott Weiland in Velvet Revolver for me as well. I always thought Josh Todd from Buck Cherry would have been a great fit. However I heard that when he jammed with the band Slash and Duff thought he had the tendencies to be another Axl. Basically when you lose out on a gig to Scott Weiland because the band think that Scott Weiland is going to be less hassle than you it is pretty damning. Perhaps controversial I know, but it seemed to me like he was doing a substandard Axl Rose rather than being the kind of cool version of Scott Weiland that I actually liked in latter period STP. It was especially off-putting in the sense that Weiland had adopted very Eddie Vedder traits in the Plush era STP. Ultimately when I heard Velvet Revolver I always thought 'does Eddie Vedder ever get drunk and sing some Guns 'n' Roses songs for a laugh?'. Make no mistake, if he did, I would pay to listen. I would also say Lajon Witherspoon from Sevendust. Not because he is bad and the band are good. More that he is a great singer stuck in a (very) average nu-metal band.

If you set a bass up so that it is optimally set up for a specific tuning, then you are not going to cause any problems to the truss rod or the bass in general. You are not damaging the bass. You just need to be aware that you need to give the bass a proper set up before you back to standard tuning. For this reason it is worth thinking ''do I really need to use this tuning'?' before committing to a tuning. That tuning looks pretty strange though (Bb to F is a fifth, then F to Bb is a fourth, I think...). This would befuddle me in terms of the fingering (as a guitarist I don't like DADGAD tunings). I'm guessing that this would be cool if you need to use a lot of ringing open strings for a kind of 'drone effect'. If I needed a low Bb and I was committing to tuning a bass relying on a 'drop Bb' open notes, I would probably tune a bass Bb, F, Bb, Eb, Ab. This is really just tuning a light set of five strings up a semi tone but tuning the low B string to the drop D equivalent. By using light gauge five strings tuned up a semi tone, the tension isn't going to be much more than a medium set of string tuned B-G in standard.

I just want to echo your comments re: the Babicz bridge. It utterly transformed my old 1974 EB3. I couldn't intonate it properly or set the action properly for 15 years until I tried the Babicz replacement this year. The old Gibson 3 point is now in a box just in case I need to sell the bass and some guy wants the bass to be 'original'.

The seller in question frequently lists items with prices which are, in polite terms, incredibly aspirational rather than realistic. His tendency for marking up 1980s Yamaha guitars for extortionate prices were starting to annoy me more on Facebook than Tough Mudder adverts and Guardian articles about the merits of random fad diets. Personally, I consider the seller in question to be a professional dealer who dresses himself up as an individual collector who is' just deciding to sell a few items from his private collection'. I have no problem with professional dealers, however I do have a real issue with how the seller presents himself or his collection on Facebook community threads. I don't think that professional dealers should be using Facebook marketplace threads (which are designed to be community threads used by private individuals) to sell their wares. I would also never buy a bass from anyone that installs string in the manner shown in the pictures of the instrument in question. Even in the Wal market, I wouldn't be paying much over £2,500 grand, maybe £3,000 at a push and I really really wanted it.

I can't wait for the Fender marketing videos of lots insta-famous teenagers walking through the woods and/or city centres with the bass hanging over the shoulder without a case, never actually playing the bass, but instead providing a bunch of nauseating marketing speak such such as: 'I love the snap and zing of the finish' 'you know, it feels old, but it also kinda feels new?' 'it is so versatile, I can play it with my fingers or with a pick' 'for me, bass is the foundation of music, and the Fender Precision is the foundation of bass' I like the look of the seventies Jazz because it looks like a Fendeer Jazz bass and I like Fender Jazz basses.

I think that you will need to be more specific in terms model numbers and year of production. Do you mean the old style Bassman combos that were designed as bass amps in the 50s/60s but which achieved fame as guitar amps? Do you mean the vintage valve amp heads in the 70s and 80s? If so, they can be used for guitar or bass. For bass though these designs designs are (comparatively) underpowered to the modern Fender Bassman Pro series of bass amps, which are valve bass amps comprising the 100T (100w valve amp) and Super Bassman (300 watt valve amp). There are also Fender Bassman bass amps which are not valve amps, comprising the hybrid Bassman 500 and Bassman 800 designs. The new Bassman Pro and the Rumble series are generally good amps. In terms of a vintage amp, it will obviously depend on the condition of that specific amp.

Love me some Clutch. I think I have seen them 8 times now. I have seen Dan Maines play a P bass, Jazz, SG bass and a Rickenbacker. He always just gets a great tone.

I won’t argue with your points, but that tone is still that tone. It is a classic design but not without its faults and tonal limitations. The Hofner Beatle type bass and Gibson EB3 are also classic designs that are really not going to achieve the ‘suitable for any genre’ nature of Jazz and Precision designs. People don’t buy Rickenbackers, or Hofner Beatle basses and expect to be able to play them with the ease of say a Dingwall, Sadowsky or Spector or for them to deliver the same variety of tones. People don’t really buy Rickenbackers if they want a bass that is going to need to cover number of different styles or tones. They just buy a Rickenbacker bass because they want it to sound like a Rickenbacker bass. They are always going to be marmite basses and the way that they company operates also makes them difficult to root for on forums such as this.

To be fair, it is a signature model for a player who made his name (to the extent that underground stoner bassists who play tuned down to C can make their name ) playing the old style 4001s. It was hardly going to be a massive design change in terms of ergonomics and features. It is a bass designed for a specific player who really likes the original classic design. It is no different than the numerous ‘signature’ Fender Jazz and Precision models which are barely any different from Fender’s normal line of Jazz and Precision models. it is strange though that Rickenbacker have never ever bothered to try out an entirely new bass design. They pretty much found one bass design in the 1960s and have pretty much stuck it ever since, warts and all (and there are a lot of warts). Also, the green inlays are basically kind of an in joke on the basis that Al Cisneros smokes a lot of weed.

I remember that 'pedal modelling a wireless' release. It was a totally mad idea. I suppose that one my favourite genre's (lo-fi psychedelic stoner/doom) is very much a guitar-pedal-valve amp genre, mostly in smaller venues when there is a higher chance of actually hearing the sounds coming from the backline, which generally consisted of a half stack/full stack and a single bass 8x10. At the level of AC/DC though, I think that the idea of running multiple 100 watt heads and fully loaded walls of Marshalls is basically absurd. Even being an amp lover, if I was playing stages of that size I would be probably be running in ears.

That is a pretty good idea. Angus's signal is also a mix of lots of different overly hot biased amps, so to get that authentic non-authentic sound you might a need a few Kempers set up. Some people just prefer using real amps on the 'why have something that models a really nice vintage amp when I already own a really nice vintage amp.' I'm not sure though that I would automatically assume that Angus' hearing is completely shot. I do get the sense though that he probably last really considered the merits of his set up in about 1980. The same might be the case for his techs as well. In terms of modeling amps Angus is probably not even aware of the first generation Sansamp pedals. If I was Angus's tech at the moment I would just bias the amps to factory settings in the first instance and see if he noticed the difference. I'm guessing that the ongoing repair costs would immediately be reduced by half and Angus would not really know the difference. You would then only need about half of the amps that are currently being used on tour. After that, then I would slowly introduce a Kemper or two. After 5 years, Angus would probably be down to two Kempers and a Marshall DSL half stack mic'ed up with an SM57.

According to Angus's techs, there is apparently some tonal benefits, as apparently Angus thinks that it makes the amp sound a bit 'stressed' and delivers a better tone to his ears. I'm not sure that buy into the logic though. Valve amps are expensive enough to retube and fix to begin with. Unless I was mega rich I wouldn't even bother experimenting.

I didn’t say it was practical or good for your health. Also, he is 71 and has been singing in bands for decades, well before the development of sophisticated in ears and modern monitoring systems. It is hardly surprising, especially considering his other hobby is racing sports cars! I think it is brilliant in the sense that I am interested in seeing a band still tour with a backline set up that is completely antiquated to modern set ups. I don’t think that we will ever see a band tour with that kind of set up again. It is like watching a piece of history.

There is a quite brilliant AC/DC 'Rig Rundown' video showing the set up. The thing that really surprised me was that Angus Young's wall of Marshalls are not dummy cabs, they are all fully loaded cabs being driven by a fleet of Marshall amps that are being run at deliberately off-bias. The techs are constantly swapping in and out amps as they break. I suppose if you can do it, do it! Practicality be damned.

In 30 years classic rock backlines will consist entirely of holograms and Joe Bonamassa's 100 watt Marshall full stack.

In that case then, I would definitely just get a matching 8x10 and run with that. I personally wouldn't run two different cabs as part of the same rig. Phasing issues could make the sound or tone to vary markedly from venue to venue or depending on where you stand on the stage. Better to just get another matching cab for 'more of the same'. Matching giant cabs also looks cool. If you want to get really over the top, run 2 8x10 stacked horizontally to give yourself a massive de facto 16x10 set up. Then run another 2 8x10s on the other side of the stage. I have seen a few bands do this (alice in Chains being one). Generally large bands who I suspect were actually using the cabs as set dressing and they were actually using in ear monitors. The only drawback in tonal terms of using that many cabs is that you will have so much stage volume even with the amp on minimal settings. With a valve amp I like to have the option of driving the power amp a little bit. Not sure that would be physically possible when running 2 8x10s.

As I own a 6x10 I would like to point out that a 6x10 can be more difficult to move than an 8x10 unless it is a lightweight design. The length of an 8x10 makes it easier to lean into and slide into the back of a car without having to physically lift it up. A 6x10 is a shorter cab, and generally nearly as heavy as an 8x10. With heavyweight designs such as Ampeg SVT 6x10 or a Mesa Powerhouse 6x10, it is often a far bigger struggle to lean the 610 cab and slide it into the back of the car than the 8x10 equivalent because of the lower pivot point. I have a Mesa 6x10 and I often have to lift the cab into the car/van. This is a pretty tough one job. I can manage it now at the age of 33 but I am aware that as a long term lighter solution is needed. However, a Mesa 6x10 was my dream cab for 15 years, so I at least want to enjoy it now that I finally have one. Can't imagine needing more than a single 6x10 or 8x10 on stage though. My thoughts, since you already have a 4 ohm 8x10, why not just buy two 8 ohm 4x10 cabs. Stacked they look much like an 8x10, with the benefit that: 1. 2 4x10s should be easier to move than 1 6x10, on the basis that two manageable load ins are preferable to a single load in resembling a world's strongest man event; and 2. You have the option of using a single 4x10 for gigs that don't require a massive rig or where space is an issue.

That toggle switch sounds like a great idea! I have a Metro and NYC and have always thought that a toggle switch would be preferable to the push/pull system on the VTC knob. Black hardware looks sweet as well.

Awesome 30th birthday present indeed!

To be fair I didn’t change the strings until I was 15 and then I didn’t change them again until I was 22. I was using flatwounds but even so...