funkle

[quote name='bassman7755' timestamp='1379109325' post='2208906'] With Banacos/Arnold method there is no such ambiguity because you always reference all notes to the key center rather than each other. [/quote] Exactly.

[quote name='AntLockyer' timestamp='1378976983' post='2207180'] I changed to flats and put a new pickguard on mine (plus a good setup) I like it. I'm tempted by another one with rounds on. [/quote] What other pickguards fit this bass?

I modded mine with various things. Hipshot tuners, J retro, Babicz bridge. Honestly, the tuners and bridge upgrade did nil to change the sound, so I put it back to stock and enjoyed it just the way it is. It's an excellent bass for not a lot of money. The J Retro now lives in my Celinder, but I might hunt down another to put back in this bass. Most basses are going to sound the way they do. I think the stock pickups sound just fine and generally hardware doesn't make much odds to sound in my experience. IMO a preamp, the type of pickup installed, and string selection (and of course the player) make the biggest differences to sound on a given bass. The rest can be to taste/aesthetics/function.

[quote name='dave_bass5' timestamp='1378401848' post='2199826'] This was not my experience when i did it, but maybe i wasnt really listening out for it. I had the necks reversed for well over a year before putting the Lakland neck on it. I [/quote] Maybe just how those particular parts mated, or didn't, in my case.

[quote name='stevie' timestamp='1377809753' post='2192320'] My Yamaha BB has a very slim neck and does a perfect imitation of a P-Bass (P-Bass pickup). There's a thread on them in this section that shouldn't be too hard to find. [/quote] Which BB do you have Stevie? Is it [u]exactly[/u] a Precision tone, or just most of the way there?

This is exactly the dilemma I'm having at the moment....I love my Squier CV 60's P (with John East P-Retro) - strung with GHS Pressurewound Flats - and I'm sure a good chunk of the tone is in the meaty neck. Nonetheless I find my Jazz (a Celinder) gets taken to most gigs as it's neck is much more friendly. [FYI, I did stick on my Squier CV Jazz neck onto the Squier CV 60's P - and I thought the tone lost something. I had the same feeling about a Squier Precision Deluxe (Jazz width and contour neck, P-J pickups), though it was a very nice bass.] I'd buy an Fender Precision of any stripe in a second if it had Jazz width nut (1.5") with a Precision bass thickness/contour front-to-back. This is very much what Musicman Sterling and Big Al necks are like, and they feel just great. I think the extra wood front-to-back does affect the tone of both of these instruments positively, and I would hope a similar neck would help retain the 'meatiness' of a Precision if I tried it on one of them. Haven't found a way to do this apart from going custom though! I played an MIA P yesterday in Guitar Guitar in Edinburgh that was just outstanding though. Just a perfect Precision tone...beautiful. It just resonated very well acoustically. Sigh.

I do have an issue with just learning intervals and linking them to songs. I'm not convinced it works. The difference between knowing what a major 3rd sounds like when it is 'Do'/'Mi' (root/3rd) versus what it is when it is 'Sol/'Ti' (5th/7th) is quite different. I did learn the 'intervals' way first, and moved on to these other things afterwards because I wasn't sure it was helpful. As ever, your mileage may vary. I hope that this is helpful.

[quote name='Tandro' timestamp='1378248816' post='2197819'] I need to revamp my approach to this ear training, along with singing stuff. As mentioned by Bilbo, the ultimate goal for me is to link ideas to fingers. Unfortunately Pete, I have gone down the same road and I'm finding things at the cost of 'years of slow discovery'. But better now than later. I was pleasantly surprised to find the Chris Tarry stuff available again! I thought it was all subscription based now. One last thing on the Bruce Arnold One Note series, is it basically all this same stuff? Is it just him playing the cadence and a note or is there more meat to it and worth the investment? [/quote] There are a number of Banacos exercises. Step 1 is generally what Bruce Arnold calls the 'One Note' exercise. This is exactly the same as what you get for free with the software I linked to. However he does provide it in a nice portable format, and the accompanying book is useful. However if you're on the cheap the software works just fine. I think it took me 6-12 months to get this exercise at 20 mins per day 4-5 days per week. Step 2a is to do what is sometimes called 'Key Note Recognition'. Once again the software is out there (at miles.be) and free. The note is always 'C', but the I-IV-V-I cadence changes key all the time, so you have to always work out the key (though as I said you always know the note played for reference against the key is C). I do find it is actually harder to do the Bruce Arnold version than the software version, so I generally did the Bruce Arnold version. I think this again took me 6-12 months to 'get' though I did other stuff at the same time. Step 2b was to play a cadence (I-IV-V-I) and then simply sing the note you were asked to sing - root, 3rd, b2, whatever. The mp3 would then play the correct note and you could check you had it right. I did that at the same time as Step 2a and took about a 8-12 months over it. I'm now doing Bruce Arnold's 'Ear Training for Fanatics' in the car, which is now working through singing pairs of notes over a drone. e.g for C, D#, I sing 'Do' and 'Di' in all 12 keys and then sing C/D# in each key [shifting their function in each key] - so: Do/Di in C, Sol/Si in F, Re/Me in Bb, etc. This is then done four 3 or 4 groupings, etc. I think the next step is to do the Charlie Banacos/Bruce Arnold 'One Note' exercise with 2 notes simultaneously, then 3, etc. I hear Mike Stern made it to 4 notes simultaneously. Others have gone higher. Like I said, I'm still way behind in doing as much transcribing as I ought to have done. This stuff I view as essential but no substitute for the work of listening, working out what is being played, and playing it on the instrument. On the whole I would recommend the Bruce Arnold materials - he provides personal guidance and materials and he learned it directly from Charlie Banacos. Seems like a good resource to me.

Recently sold Gaf a Zoom B2. A very straightforward transaction. Thanks Gaf!

Bilbo is bang on the money; transcribing is key. By which I mean, learn how to play on the bass what you are listening to (NOT how to write down what you are hearing first, though that is important too). I initially learned intervals years ago but found they weren't terribly useful to me on the bandstand. I have found the 'Charlie Banacos' ear training methods far more effective than learning intervals in the way you describe. Examples of those that have used it include Mike Stern, Chris Tarry, Jeff Berlin, Bruce Arnold, Joe Hubbard, et al. Good descriptions of this type of ear training reside at: http://www.miles.be/articles/14-the-charlie-banacos-exercise (original at http://www.franksinger.com/ear%20training.htm) http://www.joehubbardbass.com/473/ear-training/ http://christarrylessons.com/ear-training/ The software (free) which can get you started: http://www.miles.be/software/4-functional-ear-trainer-basic How to set the software: http://www.joehubbardbass.com/473/ear-training/ Who was Charlie Banacos? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Banacos Bruce Arnold is aguitarist with a good website who essentially breaks down the Charlie Banacos method into bits that he sells. I have bought stuff from him and found it useful. http://brucearnold.com/blog/ear-training-guided-tour/ Doing this and transcribing works synergistically. Transcribing is the ultimate musical vitamin, though - if you're around your bass I would generally say do that. The other ear training stuff I have posted here I have found ways to do whilst I am commuting. 20-30 mins a day whilst commuting adds up to a lot over years, and I have found transcribing easier since I have also done this formal ear training (caveat: though I have also learned solfege before I did that). This cost years of slow discovery. I took my own advice about transcribing later than I should have. Hopefully your journey is much shorter. Pete

[quote name='bassman7755' timestamp='1378051794' post='2195143'] The problem with that statement is that it assumes a particular casualty (i.e. that the "greats" became such primarily because they learned by ear, rather than that they learned by ear because its the easiest method for people of in top .01% of the latent ability range). [/quote] Well, I couldn't say definitely one way or the other, but when great players say to get on with the business of using our ears, I'm taking that advice (though a lot later than I should have). And I keep hearing the same advice from many great players - Scott Devine, Chris Tarry, Jeff Berlin, Janek Gwizdala and Bob Reynolds to name a few. There is a lot of research (detailed in popular books like Outliers, The Talent Code, etc) which basically says that 'talent' is directly related to focused and applied hard work. 4,000 hours for professionals, 8-10,000 hours for 'masters'. I am happy to go with evidence that says working harder will lead to improvement, and doesn't ascribe 'talent' to inborn abilities. The rule applied to e.g. Mozart too.

+1 to most of this thread too and most definitely to the OP. I've spent most of the last 6 months working on technical stuff given to me by Joe Hubbard, but stopped transcribing quite so much (apart form having to transcribe a bunch of tunes back in February for a dep gig with a function band). I feel like I've left a gap in my practice routine... So, I've been working the last fornight or so just on one tune - Snarky Puppy's 'Skate U'. Iv'e found it great to try and nail absolutely everything *exactly* as Michael League plays it. I can't say it's all nailed yet, but the first half of the song and most of the bass solo is down. One mistake I think I have made in the past when 'transcribing' is to work something out, write the dots out, then learn how to play it on bass - as opposed to work it out, play it until it's right, THEN write out the dots. I've learned a lot more lately through the latter than the former. I picked up this particular tip from a sax player, Bob Reynolds, who I respect and I think sounds phenomenal. His rationale is all the greats learned by ear first of all, though of course I do note they were all pretty well muscially trained too. The main problem I have in dealing with good advice is following it. I seem to have to make the mistakes first and then work out that what I've been previously told is in fact the right thing to do.

[quote name='hollywoodrox' timestamp='1375131246' post='2157142'] carol kaye advocates saying the names of the root of arpeggios while you practise, her tutorials seem to be focused on training the ear at the same time as learning arpeggios and lines, I think she is a great educator [/quote] +1. I took lessons with her for a summer back in the 90's. She was tough but fair. I have her various books around the place and learned to read a fair bit from them.