Sibob

[quote name='mcgraham' post='494928' date='May 22 2009, 10:07 AM']Depends on what you want the sound to be! For what it's worth I spent ages deciding what to put in my Geddy, and I eventually bought a set of DiMarzio Model J's over the Ultra J's. Why? I wanted something with a fantastic beefy tone as it's base tone, no eqing required. Something even enough to sound full, but something powerful enough to cut through a mix. The DiMarzio Model J's deliver that in spades. Oodles of usable tones from those bad boys. Ridiculously good price for what they offer. Mark[/quote] Were you finding that you had to EQ the model J's less than the Ultrajazzes then? I know we're probably using different amps and basses, but I find that I need very little EQ on the Ultra's, plug in, sound phat! Si

Depends what you want it for! I think I'd probably stay away from the Affinity & Standards, if you want a more modern, dirtier sound, get a VMJ/P (seymour duncan pickups have a higher output). But if you're after a smoother tone with growl, go for the CV's. I recently picked up a Squier Deluxe Jazz 5 on here, and it's a ridiculous amount of bass for the money I paid! If I was gonna buy one of the above now, just for kicks, I'd get a classic vibe! Si

As far as I'm aware, EMG's are the only 'active pickups' on your list!? By that I mean, they require a battery without a preamp, everything else listed here is a passive pickup! My vote goes for the Dimarzio Ultrajazzes, high output...they roar for passives. Round, growly, loud. and they're humbucking! Lovely! I'd also give a +1 for staying away from Bartolinis if you're running them passively, severely underpowered without a preamp. Si

Just relating back to a couple of earlier points, I bent the ear of a music business accountant friend of mine with regards to Advances and how record companies account for them, this is (a slightly reduced version) of what he said: "[i]As far as I am concerned record companies treat advances as 'non-recoupable' which means that they cannot claw back the monies from artists in the way you describe[/i]" (paying out of your own pocket)... "[i]At no stage do the record company attempt to get this back from the artist. Essentially the balance remains as long as the artist fails to take it to a positive figure"...[/i] "[i]For the record company the expenses are generally written off unless they know they will recoup in which case they form part of WIP (work in progress). This is a different process to the relationship between record company and artist whereby any negative balance will remain as long as the relationship remains or the artist manages to recoup the balance." [/i] and probably most importantly: "[i]The only way an artist would ever repay an advance is if in reality it was a loan, not an advance. No music lawyer would ever let his artist sign a contract whereby advances were repayable if the project failed. The advance is the record companies risk, not the artist[/i]" I know this is just one professionals view of it, and I still stand by the statement that 'all contracts are different', but there are lines lol!. And I don't want this to seem like I'm trying to prove a point at all, this thread seems like it could be a useful resource to people, so thought I'd continue to add to the information available! Si

[quote name='BassBunny' post='492771' date='May 19 2009, 10:23 PM']Spot on Si. It is the point at which the Pot doesn't have any effect. When you wind it one way it Boosts and the other way, Cuts.[/quote] Generally yes, but not always? The Sadowsky preamp is all boost isn't it? I suppose that means that their knobs don't have a centre-dent! Si

Great article mate! Cheers for that! Si

Fender listings generally go like this: Fender Standard Jazz/Precision bass (Mexican MIM) Fender US Standard J/P (American MIA) Si

See the story above is very cool! Nice one Teej The DIY ethos can serve people incredibly well, if you know what you're doing! I think it works especially well in the roots based genres as most of the fans are completely up for supporting their community, there's an underdog mentality, and it works in the artists favour. I think a lot of the time in the rock/pop/mainstream genres, the labels and sometimes even the artists (Metallica anyone) are seen as the 'rich corporate enemy' and so people are less likely to feel loyal enough to purchase a CD over downloading illegally. Of course measuring success is completely subjective, but when we're talking about major, or even large indie, record companies, there are very specific numbers involved! . For the record, I myself would be very happy with the place that Teej has found himself in, anything else is a bonus Si

Glad to hear it went well, such a fun song to play, you can't really do anything wrong....it's that kinda groove This is a great live version of the song by the guys themselves (if you haven't seen it already), with an extended bass break Si

Yeah my last couple of gigs have been tone heaven, my saturday night (just gone) gig to be specific! Just my '03 US Jazz into my Ashdown rig, but it was beautiful!! Si

[quote name='chris_b' post='492373' date='May 19 2009, 02:14 PM']It was a long time ago, and all contracts are different, so I would never take the advice on these specific BBC and Wiki sites as anything other than just general info.[/quote] Of course, absolutely 'general info'! And I agree that all contracts are different. But I'm afraid, to me at least, your friends predicament is in a world of its own. Of course I've heard of anything and everything being charged to the artist, meals, parties etc, but almost always recouped from royalties, not from the artist's own finances earned from other ventures unrelated to the contract or even to music!!! It really does go to show that one NEEDS to thoroughly read, or have checked by an independant legal party, any and all contracts! Si

source: [url="http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/soldonsong/guide/record_contract.shtml"]http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/soldonsong/gui..._contract.shtml[/url] "The advance is not money that the record company is giving you. It is essentially a loan which the record company expects to recoup through record sales, royalties and licensing of your music for other uses." source: [url="http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/onemusic/general/incomep03.shtml"]http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/onemusic/general/incomep03.shtml[/url] "If an act is running at a loss from their first album, the label is likely to want to keep a tight rein on things when it's time to record the next one. If it's a big loss then it's unlikely that there will even be a second album. The act will be 'released from their contract' - or dropped in less polite terms" "It can take years for a band to recoup and see any more income from the album. In fact there are acts who have careers spanning a few albums who have never recouped at all" source: [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recording_contract#.28iv.29_Advances.2C_Royalties_and_Recording_Costs"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recording_con...Recording_Costs[/url] "Some of the money may be "recoupable" which means that it can be earned back from record sales, some of it is money that the label is simply expected to pay out." "The loan is paid back slowly through sales." I would suggest that if you're friend, who was signed, is still paying his advance back out of his own pocket as opposed to his record sales, he might have been sold a bit of a craaaaaaaaaaaaaap deal!. I'd even be inclined to find out if that is legal or not. Si

[quote name='chris_b' post='492147' date='May 19 2009, 09:52 AM']I know I've not seen many contracts like this but the ones I have seen have never been "written off". In my experience no one makes a present of 150K, especially in the Music Business! The signed guy (the rest of us weren't signed) in one of my bands was still playing off the advance, in instalments, 5 years later! That’s why my advice is to get this contract checked out by YOUR own lawyer before you take the money.[/quote] Still paying from his own personal income? Or from any royalties he had coming in? I wasn't aware that record company advances were personal loans, more 'loans' made to the "The Artist" only recoupable against royalties made from the record(s) in question!? Si

I think the case is that any publishing or 'points' given to a bass player for writing their own bass part is down to the discretion of the producer/writer of the tune! I believe that from a legal stand-point, a song is consisted of 'Chords' and 'Melody'. Like you said, if a bassist creates a bass part that is to become an important part of the melody or chord structure, than you will obviously have more of a case for writing credit than simply performing a root-five line. Si

[quote name='chris_b' post='492135' date='May 19 2009, 09:38 AM']Mmm. So he's signed a contract and he doesn't know what it entails? That is not good! One thing is for sure....they are NOT being GIVEN anything! I would imagine, at best it is a loan and someone will have to paid it back back. Please get the contract checked out and find out what the "small print" says!![/quote] Again, without seeing the contract, it's difficult to assume. If the 150k works like a standard Record Label advance, then it is recoupable from the artist/album royalties and will obviously need to be paid back before the artist sees any royalty payment themselves. From that point of view it's a loan, but usually these companies write off such advances, simply because if an artist's royalties don't cover the outlay, they're not personally liable to pay the deficit. Also, it is very unusual (read: stupid) to sign an agreement without any legal advice. Hving said that, if they've taken legal advice and signed, then they're obviously bound to the contract. If they've signed without any legal advice having been offered or given, then that has, in the past, been grounds for voiding the contract.....via the courts of course! Si