dlloyd

[quote name='nottswarwick' timestamp='1385128275' post='2284767'] It is D Major, technically. [/quote] Technically, the tonic chord is A, so it absolutely isn't in D major... Just as a song in B minor isn't in D major. it's A major with a chromatic subtonic substitution. The tonic chord gives the key of the piece, not the collection of chords. However, there is a certain amount of muddiness about this and while it's theoretically "more correct" to notate a piece in A mixolydian as A major with accidentals, a lot of publishers will just deal with it as if it's in D major.

Here's a nice treatment of the chromatic subtonic (b7): [url="http://www.angelfire.com/space/u_line/thechro1.htm"]http://www.angelfire.com/space/u_line/thechro1.htm[/url] [url="http://www.angelfire.com/space/u_line/thechro1.htm"]http://www.angelfire.com/space/u_line/thechro2.htm[/url]

It's in A mixolydian. The b7 4 1 (1 b7 4) progression is a classic... Sweet Home Alabama for instance. It has the same notes and chords as you would find in D major, but the tonic is on the Dominant chord... there's no resolution to D.

[quote name='timmo' timestamp='1383758115' post='2268691'] I am currently trying to learn bass patterns via the Register of Guitar Tutors, I have a pattern they call reggae style. It starts at G minor, to A flat, back to G, then A flat to D. My question is, why is the A, a flat, and not a sharp ? I hope that makes sense [/quote] Convention has it that whatever key we're playing in (simple diatonic music), we have notes (and hence chords) that correspond to each of the letters of the alphabet between A and G. You don't have to worry why that is, and without getting into the history of plainsong and the medieval monastic tradition, it's because it's easier than the alternative. The conventional major keys are: C# 7 sharps: F#, C#, G#, D#, A#, E#, B# F# 6 sharps: F#, C#, G#, D#, A#, E# B 5 sharps: F#, C#, G#, D#, A# E 4 sharps: F#, C#, G#, D# A 3 sharps: F#, C#, G# D 2 sharps: F#, C# G 1 sharp: F# C None F 1 flat: Bb Bb 2 flats: Bb, Eb Eb 3 flats: Bb, Eb, Ab Ab 4 flats: Bb, Eb, Ab, Db Db 5 flats: Bb, Eb, Ab, Db, Gb Gb 6 flats: Bb, Eb, Ab, Db, Gb, Cb Cb 7 flats: Bb, Eb, Ab, Db, Gb, Cb, Fb In practice, you won't see C# or Cb major as Db and B major are enharmonic (sound the same, just with different names) and are easier to think about, particularly when you go past the point where you're thinking about patterns in which you put your fingers and start thinking about the actual music. Here's the notes in Cb and B major: Cb = B Db = C# Eb = D# Fb = E Gb = F# Ab = G# Bb = A# Cb = B Not convinced? There are theoretical keys that have more than 7 sharps, for instance D# major, which has 9 sharps, including Fx (double sharp... same as G) and Cx (same as D)... but that would just mess with people's heads. Much easier to think of it as Eb major with 3 flats. Complex music, particularly a lot of 20th century classical music, often does away with a lot of these rules, because the diatonic system is inadequate to describe it.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1384946666' post='2282554'] Unfortunately none of your links work :-( [/quote] Yes... it looks like you have to go from the start. Go to [url="http://www.uspto.gov/"]http://www.uspto.gov/[/url] then click on "Trademarks" then "Trademark Search". Click on "Word and/or Design Mark Search (Structured)" then put in the search term box: "1495728" Bit long-winded, but it should bring up the four trademark registrations that are currently active.

Some disinformation in this thread. Musicman have trademarked their headstocks, just as Fender have, as well as the specific arrangement of string posts on the headstock: [url="http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4806:80336p.4.1"]http://tess2.uspto.g...4806:80336p.4.1[/url] [url="http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4806:80336p.4.2"]http://tess2.uspto.g...4806:80336p.4.2[/url] [url="http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4806:80336p.4.3"]http://tess2.uspto.g...4806:80336p.4.3[/url] [url="http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4806:80336p.4.4"]http://tess2.uspto.g...4806:80336p.4.4[/url] Instruments such as the Teisco, Gus and Ou7shine's don't infringe on these trademarks. The Yamaha apparently does (I imagine it's in the tuner arrangement) Edit: Note, there is no patent involved, nor is it copyright... it's a registered trademark. Edit2: The term "3+1" is also a trademark. I imagine the Shuker above also infringes the string post arrangement trademark.

[quote name='steve-bbb' timestamp='1384416537' post='2276322'] anybody listening to dave edmunds being interviewed on radio2 simon mayo show recently .... ... if you can play guitar you can play bass... [/quote] I don't think that's too controversial a statement. For most pop/rock situations any half-competent guitarist should be able to hold down a passable bassline.

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1380800579' post='2230669'] I half wouldn't mind something that attaches to the front of a bass where I can put a few picks for easy access. But not enough that I'm going to go and google one and buy it. [/quote]

I really like the original US SUBs. They were cancelled because there just wasn't enough margin in them to make them financially viable. The differences are mainly cosmetic. There's the big obvious things like the textured finish (saves on sanding and buffing) scratchplate and painted neck, but there's smaller details like the unbranded bridge (and tuners?), unfilled fret slots etc. They sound great all the same. There are a few different models: SUB 4 string active (2 band) SUB 4 string passive SUB 5 string active (2 band) SUB 5 string passive SUB Sterling The SUB Sterling is an interesting one in that it has an Alnico pickup as opposed to the ceramic pup in the Sterling... basically a Stingray in Sterling shape.

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1379041639' post='2208062'] Aren't you going to need to know more tunes to play the gig? [/quote] Could be for college entrance.

I have an old Yamaha BBN4 fretless that is incredibly light... I'm guessing around 5 to 6 lbs. I'll have to weigh it.

[quote name='ambient' timestamp='1378134926' post='2196120'] Songs, that;s how I remembered them. Major 2nd - Happy Birthday. Minor 3rd - Greensleeves. Major 3rd - While shepherds watched. Major 4th - Auld Lang Syne. Minor 6th - The theme from love story. Major 6th - And now (Frank Synatra) I can't remember what I used for a minor 7th Major 7 I used the theme from superman. After a while you just know them without referring to a song. [/quote] minor 7 = original theme from Star Trek tritone = theme from the Simpsons Perfect 5 = theme from Star Wars

[quote name='Deep Thought' timestamp='1377332093' post='2186245'] I found out yesterday that D'Addario have been making Fender strings for a few years now-same coloured ball ends-so if you like D'Addario's, buy Fenders. I will be, the Fender ones are cheaper in my local emporium. [/quote] Yup. There are a relatively limited number of string manufacturers and the smaller brands outsource production. For instance, Ken Smith strings are made by GHS and Sadowsky are made by LaBella.

[quote name='inutro' timestamp='1377645594' post='2189962'] thats the aim real music live recordings that got the great bands signed not the x factor or pop princesss stuff that gets out there today [/quote] Which great bands? I can't open your file, by the way. Probably best to post it as an MP3. Or send it on a TDK C60

The Gallery sells KSD, but this model isn't on their website.

[quote name='Fionn' timestamp='1377028962' post='2182520'] Jesus wept ... is this the low ebb in Stanley Clarke's tour de fromage? The album East River Drive, which this song is from, has some cheesy moments (a couple of great ones too), but this takes the cracker. It's not even from the 80's. Argh! ... [/quote] I bought this album when it was released, knowing nothing about Stanley Clarke other than that he was supposed to be brilliant. I put it on at a friends' house on the way home and got mocked for weeks.

[url="http://www.powerpresskits.com/PPKs/indexC.aspx?PPK=758"]http://www.powerpresskits.com/PPKs/indexC.aspx?PPK=758[/url] [url="http://www.vintagearchtop.com/van_eps.htm"]http://www.vintagearchtop.com/van_eps.htm[/url]

Similar idea to this: and this:

[quote name='police squad' timestamp='1375960165' post='2167863'] relief is fine. As I said, it was set up by my local tech. He said everything was perfect. It must be the tension thing which reminds me, how do they increase the tension in strings without changing the gauge? [/quote] If you increase the string tension, it will increase the relief.

[quote name='mart' timestamp='1375960942' post='2167878'] Agreed. There was a big difference between the extreme reaction seen in the US, and the reaction seen in the UK. But I feel the reaction to disco in the UK was stronger than, and different in nature to, the reaction to other genres. So I think there is [i]something[/i] to explain. Or at least something worth a thread on an internet forum [/quote] I imagine there may have been a racist & homophobic element to it, but I don't think that was the primary reason in the UK. Maybe the answer lies in the fact that disco appealed to women, and if men wanted to meet women, they now had to endure disco, the associated fashions and the dancing... which took a lot of men far, far out of their comfort zone. It was probably a lot easier to look like an idiot trying to be "disco" that it was trying to be a mod.

[quote name='police squad' timestamp='1375942997' post='2167611'] Anyone else come across this problem/fix [/quote] Not as such, but everything else being equal, a higher tension string will "travel" less and theoretically should buzz less. Although I wonder if you've just added extra relief by increasing the amount of pull on the neck.

I think people are misunderstanding slightly what Nile Rodgers was talking about. The US "Disco Sucks" phenomenon was significantly different to anything experienced in the UK. There may have been people who grumbled about not liking the genre here, but we didn't have the full-on riots and record burning that happened in the US.

[quote name='mart' timestamp='1375882844' post='2166877'] My son started listening to Chic this morning (which means, scarily, that probably before the year is out he'll be doing Bernard Edward lines better than I will ever be able to, and the blighter is only 12). And it got me to thinking about the Nile Rodgers documentary, and the impact of the "Disco Sucks" campaign on the band. So what was going on there? Why did Disco provoke such a reaction amongst rock lovers? Even punk didn't seem to arouse the same ire amongst music lovers. Was it a generational thing? Can anybody remember? (Or guess?) [/quote] It's fairly well established what was going on... working class, white men saw disco as a threat as it was associated with afro-americans, latinos and the lgb community. Some of the backlash was quite violent: [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disco_Demolition_Night"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disco_Demolition_Night[/url]

Never been a fan of the Starcaster headstock, but that is nice. Now why did they also name the sub-Squier Affinity range "Starcaster"?

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1375866554' post='2166556'] So could you buy modern Star Wars figures and relic them..? [/quote] You could do. One of the funniest things about that hobby is that there was a huge market for the figures in countries where Kenner (the company who made them) didn't market them either directly or through a partner company (like Palitoy in the UK). So in countries like Turkey and Poland there were companies that made bootlegs. Some of these were quite funky, like those put out by the Turkish company Uzay: These are now worth thousands of pounds, much more than the real figures, so there are now people trying to sell ordinary figures that have been painted to look like the bootlegs. Faking fakeness, if you like...