funkle

Another vote for Reaper. I'm still getting to grips with it. By far the best tutorials I have found are at Groove3 - http://www.groove3.com/str/reaper-4-explained.html. There are quite a few other Reaper tutorials there but this series really helps get you to grips with it. $35 to download, $15 per month to access all the videos on the website.That website has a huge number of other tutorials too, on loads of different DAWs/bits of software. It's great.

My old bass. Lovely instrument with a lovely Old CAR finish. Enjoy. Model number was JB62-M.

[quote name='stevie' timestamp='1431965350' post='2776690'] That was an outstandingly well considered and even-handed review. Thanks. [/quote] Thanks kindly. I aim to please...and posting on any thread in the Amps section can be an inflammatory business, sometimes. I think Alex is doing outstanding work in engineering cabs with high performance/low distortion at loud SPL, excellent dispersion, etc, and the products are worth supporting. His aesthetic is not what I prefer, but that is very much a personal choice. For me, it looks like my ears prefer cabinets which have good enough (but not outstanding) drivers, are loud in the mids, have less bass (but enough), and distort/add character as the volumes increase - i.e. pretty typical bass guitar cabinets. (I had forgotten to say in all my reviews I did try out an Audiokinesis TC112AF as well, which had absolutely astonishing low end wallop, but again was too polite for me, and even driven hard had marked limits to SPL achieved. Both my drummer and I preferred the voicing of the CN112 cabs and the 'hair' they added.) Is it too inflammatory to say that, after years of researching and trying out gear, I still think the player makes the most difference to the sound in the room?

Tom, I will PM you. I have Sib 7 so can edit whatever you have, if you wish to share. I thought you and Joe had similar technique. Good to know. I am currently studying with Joe and trying to do the bazillion hours of practice that logically flow on from his exercises. Great musical content. Your blog is doing fine. I enjoyed playing through what you've put out there - I never would have looked at some of the stuff on my own I reckon - and I suspect there is a large silent majority appreciating the work you have done. I am inspired enough that I am going to try and commit to doing full-song playalongs on Youtube along with posting up dots. Anyway, I'll stop there and let things get back on topic...

I'm a floating thumb advocate, but I'm still not perfect with it, even after years of using it. I tend to get a lot of false harmonics from my thumb floating over the strings, even now (I seem to have a talent for it), and I have to put my floating thumb back nearer the bridge a fair bit to ameliorate this. I asked Todd Johnson about it over on Scott's Bass Lessons during a seminar he gave and he said he used to have a similar issue. His advice was just to move the thumb elsewhere. Scott Devine has a useful variation of the floating thumb technique where he has more of a movable anchor. It feels a bit weird to me when I try it but it feels like it would work well if I stuck with it. I think it is less economical in motion, though, than floating thumb. The thumb ends up sitting on the pickup when playing E string, on E when playing A string, on D when playing G string. The thumb ends up pointing sideways a little but exerting pressure on the strings below the one being played to mute them. Works for him - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDSAd29kJ0o. Joe Hubbard has yet another variation which I think sounds a lot like what Tom Kenrick uses. - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXr75R2egt0. I can't watch it as blocked whilst at work but I think it's similar to Tom. Not to neglect the left hand either when muting - I have found I can cause a lot of noise with my left hand from not being careful with taking my finger off the string; you might want to look at that too. I second Tom Kenrick's suggestion that there has to be a certain amount of pressure on the string to get a good sound. The concept of a 'rest stroke' vs a 'free stroke' is useful here. 'Rest strokes' are where you play 'through' the string and land on the string below - what I do 90% of the time. Gives a nice punchy tone with a little percussive noise from landing on the string below. 'Free strokes' are much smaller movements and you do not land on the string below; it gives a much lighter/middier tone and allows for great speed. You do end up sounding more like Gary Willis. Gary Willis can play, but I do not like his tone. In fact, I just want to give quick props to Tom Kenrick here - I've been enjoying his transcriptions a lot recently. I have also generally found that his commentary on various topics whenever I have seen them is solid and useful. Although, sorry Tom, I did make a few corrections when I've been playing through the 'I Keep Forgettin' full transcription... Pete

[quote name='goonerjoe' timestamp='1431281086' post='2769570'] [color=#000000][font=-apple-system-font][size=3]Hi all,[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=-apple-system-font][size=3]My current set up is a fender P into a Orange TB500 via Sansamp BDDI… While I'm delighted with the sound of the cab, my main issue is I live in a 4th floor flat and my usual rehearsal space is also on the 3rd floor of an office block. The Berg is relatively light… but can be awkward to carry down narrow stairs (or just loads of stairs for that matter).[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=-apple-system-font][size=3]I've been looking at the Barefaced website, particularly at the super Compact cabs…The plan is to buy two, use one for rehearsals and smaller gigs and both cabs for larger shows. Will one of these be able to handle the job of the OBT500, or would i always need to use both? [/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=-apple-system-font][size=3]Finally, can anyone tell me how the Barefaced cabs in general compare with the Berg's, in terms of build quality and any other general observations/comparisons.[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=-apple-system-font][size=3]Or should I suck it up, stop being a wimp and appreciate the CN212? [/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=-apple-system-font][size=3]I can sense some GAS bubbling away! [/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=-apple-system-font][size=3]Cheers.[/size][/font][/color] [/quote] Responding to the OP: Having owned the BF BB2 and the Berg CN112 x 2, I will offer some thoughts. I have owned other flat cabs like the Acme B1 and B2, as well as the 'flat' powered Berg IP112ER. The BB2 could apparently be made to sound like the Super Compact by turning down the horn. The BB2 with the horn up was a reasonably flat and super sweet in the highs, and it was gorgeously old school with the horn down. I liked it a lot, and it had pretty good treble extension from the cone even when the horn was turned down. It was light, it was sensitive to power. I didn't like the paint job or the corners, or the external handle. It still felt tough as boots though. It had plenty of lows when EQ'd, though less than the IP112ER, but a little more than the CN112. It likely was a one cab solution for most situations. It was a fairly sizeable and slightly bulky cab for a 1x12, but that is part of good engineering for the driver. I don't like how slot ports look either, but that is just my taste. The CN112 (x2) I currently run is quite different. An individual CN112 has good lows for the E and is just a tad shy on a B, which EQ boost can sort if desired. I worked out the -3db point as probably being around 62hz - ish, after I took the cab apart and worked out the internal volume. The driver is probably the Faital 12PR300. It is a loud cab, mainly because it is sensitive in the mids. It has the typical tweeter response, not as sweet as the BB2. There doesn't seem to be much of a gap between the top of the driver's frequency response and where the tweeter kicks in, at least on axis. It is not flat at all in its overall response, and I didn't like that at home, but I love it on the gig. I can overdrive it if I wallop it with power, which I could never manage with the BB2. Each CN112 cab is very light, looks great, not bulky, and easy to manage around doors and stairs with the flush handles. They do look better than the BF cabs, but are clearly engineered for a totally different goal. 1x CN112 handles all my little jazz gigs with plenty of volume and enough lows. Some small rooms it can be too much in the lows, which just shows you how real world rooms emphasise some bass frequencies unpredictably. Other rooms I like to make sure I am near a wall to boost bass a little. 2 x CN112 is louder than I will ever need at full steam, sounds fabulous in the lows, and has the typical snap of the tweeters. I usually turn one of them off. I love it when I get to play through both. I assume a CN212 sounds similar. I think the CN212 you already have is an excellent and typically 'bass guitar' voiced 1 cab solution. The drivers are pretty decent (though not technically as good in terms of Vd, power handling, and distortion levels at volume as the ones in the BF Super Compact/BB2 or I suspect the Vanderkley MNT112). 1 BF Super Compact will sound quite different to the CN212 and I think will be less loud at max power handling. But it will be a lot lighter in weight and cleaner at high power levels as it is engineered differently. Alex's Super Compact cabs are correctly sized to get the most out of the drivers that are in them, from what I understand. Make of that stream of consciousness what you will. Best of luck. Pete

Return it. Mods never fix a duff bass the way you think they will, and you never get your money back. I am a serial modder and have learned which mods I will now make and which aren't worth the time. PIckup and preamp changes are pricey and generally just not worth it on a low end model. Get your money back and look again for something else. My feeling about 5 strings is that they are hard to get right. Cheap 5ers always end up being that, cheap 5ers. I have played a lot of 5ers in the last year and would suggest the cheapest worthwhile mid range model being a Lakland 55-01. Of course the neck and string spacing may not be to your taste... Secondhand you can do very well, of course.

Just been through a bout of Stingray GAS myself. Always felt the sound was a bit marmite - and for some reason I always liked Sintgrays in other peoples hands but not my own. Tried out a bog-standard Stingray 5H in the shop (both rosewood and maple necks) - liked both. Thought, hmm, I seem to be warming to these. Tried out a Neptune Blue PDN Stingray 5H - arrived damaged, didn't gel with it like I had in the shop, returned it. Tried a Stingray 5HS and liked it but it wasn't quite right - sold it to someone who sounds far better on it than I ever did (hello Dave, if you're out there). Then... I succumbed to GAS and bought Meyelpenek's 20th Anniversary Stingray 5HH.... Whoa...what a belter! I don't know about this whole 'mahogany tone block' business (?snake oil), but I love the dual HH configuration and the 'tweaked' preamp that they put in this model. The fretwork was as perfect as any I have found on even my more expensive instruments. It plays and sounds just great. I will do some recording with it soon. If you see a 20th Anniversary 5er, I would suggest buying it if you have the chance. I am a total convert to Stingrays now, but like any model, I guess you have to find the right one. Pete

Dave is so nice, I had to sell to him twice. Ha! Just sold him my Stingray 5 HS and he popped by to collect it. Thoroughly nice bloke who can play. What's not to like? I have the feeling we may meet again somehow... Deal with in great confidence. Pete

Hi all Just wanted to feedback for Holger. We've done two deals in the last few years - I sold him my Sterling 4 HH a while back, and I just bought his Musicman Stingray 5 HH 20th Anniversary. Both deals were straightforward and he communicated well by both email and PM. The bass he just sold me was just as described and flawless. I would have no problems recommmending him to others and would be happy to deal with him again. Pete