flyfisher

Yeah I know. I've heard bankers say the same about musicians.

[quote name='SteveK' timestamp='1324662789' post='1476866'] 20 minutes, 20 hours, 20 weeks wtf has that got to do with anything? Sorry, the above sounds a little like jealousy. [/quote] Damn right it's jealousy. I certainly take Happyjack's point about The Beatles being a pro band from a very early age and having endured an intense apprenticeship to hone their craft and I'd equally agree that their acclaimed Rubber Soul and later output wouldn't have happened without the previous years, but even start to finish, it was all over in less than ten years, which is a remarkably short time really for such an impact on the music industry. But we're getting a bit off the point, which was (I think) the fairness of 50 year, 90 year, or more, royalty protection for a piece of work. Actually, I don't really care one way or the other, but I'm always surprised by inconsistencies in views - in this case the view that it's basically OK for musicians to make tens of millions out of a few years work but it's basically not OK for bankers to do the same sort of thing. Sure, I can hear the arguments that musicians enrich our cultural life (assuming you actually like music, and we all know that millions don't really care for it particularly) and bankers are just parasites, but anyone drawing a pension probably owes more to bankers than they'd like to admit.

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1324633484' post='1476396'] Bwahahahahahahahahahahahhahaha! It's a nice quote and a lovely idea, but so far removed from any aspect of the truth that it's genuinely hilarious. No offence intended, but there are some excellent biographies of The Beatles out there. You could do worse things over Xmas than reading one. [/quote] Well I've read the Hunter Davis authorised biography as well as the Lennon, Macca and Harrison ones. Perhaps I'm missing the full story having not read Ringo's biog? Of course I was exaggerating a bit, but I'd dispute it's 'so far removed from the truth'. The Beatles were multi-millionnaires by their mid-20s and could have comfortably lived off their ever-increasing royalties from then on. The fact that they chose to continue making music is irrelevant. It's also well known that even at the end of their Beatles career, they we're pulling out songs they had written during their schooldays. Look up One After 909 for example.

Maplins CPC Farnell RS Components All good suppliers of electronic and related components.

[quote name='leftyhook' timestamp='1324490627' post='1474931'] I am the least materialistic person when it comes to such things. [/quote] Perhaps not the [u]least[/u] materialistic if you're concerned enough about a logo to want to change it? But my slight 'dig' was meant in good humour (not always easy to convey in text), albeit at the expense of those types who feel it's important to favour style over substance. As for what the audience may think, do we really believe that anyone goes to see a band purely for what the bass player is currently using and to listen to their 'tone'? I suppose there might be a few such people but I rather suspect most go for the overall music and the performance.

[quote name='clashcityrocker' timestamp='1324379565' post='1473514'] I just assumed the 2x10 should be above the 15 as everyone seems to run their rigs like that! :-/ [/quote] But there's no harm in trying something different! Especially when it's so simple to do. Some people would say a 210 cab should be orientated such that the speakers are vertically aligned. Try such things and let your ears decide.

I've no experience of agents but I'd deal with them in the same way that I've dealt with lawyers, architects, builders etc. Such people are working for you, not the other way around. You are paying the agent, not the other way around. As such, you call the shots. You tell the agent what you want, what you expect, what you're prepared to do, what you're not prepared to do. of course, the agent might be looking for a naive band who will travel the length of the country to play crap gigs and let the agent take a large commission, but no one can force you to do such things. Everything is negotiable.

[quote name='leftyhook' timestamp='1324341930' post='1473320'] I have a Squier VM Jazz. It's a good 2nd bass. But, it had the [b]Squire logo[/b] on the headstock. of course if we are decent enough players we should'nt worry about displaying the fact that what we are playing isn't a top-dog instrument. But, my pride, I have to say, got the better of me when I saw an ebay job-lot that included a "fender jazz" decal. I won the bid for under £4 and have had the decal put on my bass. Snob? [/quote] Not at all, it probably matches your fake Rolex and personalised number plate.

Well, if you zoom in and keep your blinkers on then I'd agree with you that's it's not a difficult issue at all. Of course you need have no regard to anyone else about the value of your songs and all the hard work you put into them but, widening the issue a little and you may understand that no one else need have any regard to the value of your songs either - which is why millions of people are quite happy to copy and share music for free, because they don't value it like you clearly do. But legislators can't afford the luxury of wearing blinkers. They have to consider the wider issues and implications if they are to avoid bad laws. As for having a 'strange set of ideas', perhaps they're just different to yours?

All good points, which shows how difficult the whole issue really is. A 20 minute song being the distillation of an entire life? Quite possibly, but I reckon there's a fair chance that the man on the Clapham omnibus will still see it as 20 minutes of actual 'work'. There seems to be a fair bit of public distaste for successful fund managers being paid millions, but at least they actually go to work every day whereas disaffected youths such as Lennon & McCartney made hundreds of millions from knocking out 3-minute wonders while bunking off school. Musicians having the same rights as authors? Yes, why not? But that doesn't automatically mean 90 years royalty protection is 'right'. The playing field could be levelled up or down. I'm not really arguing for or against these things, mainly because I find it hard to justify them either way. If artists manage to negotiate various rights then good luck to them, but I don't see there's any particular definitive principle or 'right' for such things. I also get a bit uncomfortable about the concept of 'worthy' art when, surely, it's all a matter of subjectivity in the eye - or ear - of the audience? It's a bit like the reverence some people have for 'fine' wine. That's their choice, of course, but "the best wine in the world" means diddly-squat to anyone who doesn't actually like the stuff.

[quote name='stonecoldbass' timestamp='1324119412' post='1470938'] I mostly agree with you but I think 'the whole point' is that we need to STOP recorded music turning into a promotional tool! We shouldn't just accept that nobody buys CDs etc anymore and we should be looking to fund ways in which if we like music, we pay for what we consume. You can't say that's not fair. Why should an artist spend days/weeks/months/years slaving to craft and create the best possible presentations of his music in a recorded format only for people to view it as a free business card? I believe there are equal amounts of worth and creativity in recorded music as there are in live performances. [/quote] Conversely, why should an artist spend 20 minutes writing a song, a couple of hours recording it, and then be able to reap millions from that half-day's work for the rest of their life? Sure, it's an extreme example, but we can all think of plenty of examples so it's a well-know phenomenon. At least artists are actually doing a job of work when performing, which is something the audience can actually relate to. This, I think, is the root of the issue because it's the perception of a vast paying audiences that really matter, not the views of the artists. It's the audience that puts the value on a piece of music (or other art), not the artist. New technology has given audiences the opportunity to really make their feelings about the true value of music known and they seem to be perfectly willing to share and swap recordings for free but still pay very large sums of money for live performances. Am I the only person to have felt rather uncomfortable about the sight of multi-millionaire artists such as Sir Cliff Richards lobbying for a change in the law because they felt that 50 years 'protection' of their royalties was not enough? All this turmoil in the industry is a result of it no longer having such tight control over things, resulting in a loss of income and consequential near-panic among the music moguls. But this will pass in time as the new reality takes over. But there'll still be a lot of moaning and Cnut-like attempts to prevent the tide from coming in.

Maybe not entirely correct. Surely much good music is created in response to life experiences? What life experiences would be gained by spending all one's time in a bedroom writing songs or in a studio writing them. Like most things it's all a question of balance.

I guess it depends on the nature of the work. I spent most of my working life working in a project-orientated environment where deadlines and results were more important than being seen to be at a desk. Even during the 80s, before the widespread advent of electronic communications, I would regularly work at home if I wanted to. This became even easier when email and remote networking became widespread. I made sure my work never suffered so my bosses never cared where I was as long as they could contact me if they needed to. Consequently, time off for anything was never a problem; school plays, sports days, school runs, leaving at midday on Fridays for a long weekend, etc etc. During my 40s I doubt I ever spent a whole week in the office, even when I was the boss, and before I retired early I was working mostly from home and only visiting the main office once or twice each month. And when I was the boss I was perfectly happy for my staff to also work flexibly as long as it didn't impair their performance or the business. You may have to push for such flexibility but it's certainly possible in many jobs these days. The biggest obstacle to such working practices are 'middle managers' who have nothing to do all day except watch over their staff. My view has always been that if someone requires that level of management then they're not the right person for the job and that if the middle-manager hasn't got anything else to do then he's just unnecessary baggage for the business to carry.

I bought a firewire card years ago for downloading miniDV video for editing. I bought the cheapest I could find and it has been working fine ever since - for my camcorder, external firewire hard drives and my multi-channel audio interface. Firewire is a standard so all such cards should do the same basic thing. They also all use the same basic interface chips. Besides, how much risk is there in buying a £3 card?

[quote name='blackmn90' timestamp='1324036624' post='1470013'] I think now the only reason this thread is carrying on is because people want it to for their own boredom and lack of things to complain about. write to the BBC complaining about the cold or whatever you boring bastards do but stop ruining basschat with your wrong opinions and negativity. [/quote] Well that's just your opinion of course but it sounds pretty wrong and negative to me. The OP asked for 'any advice' so how would you suggest respondents decide what is a right or wrong opinion? How about we all assume that the OP doesn't require your help in censoring "wrong opinions" and is perfectly able to analyse the responses and decide for himself.

The (recently married) guitarist in one of my bands cried off from rehearsal this week because he's going away on holiday on Friday so can't spare the time on Thursday evening. I replied saying that he clearly hasn't got the hang of marriage yet because that sounded like an ideal reason to get out of the house while his wife does all the packing. There has been no reply . . . . .

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1323955323' post='1469115'] University is a great place for networking. Making contacts that will do you well in the future. [/quote] Indeed, if you haven't already done so at an independent school.

[quote name='EdwardHimself' timestamp='1323954142' post='1469091'] you usually see them on those documentaries about council workers who have to clean up "remains" from houses and flats... [/quote] . . . but are they the council workers or the 'remains'?

[quote name='silddx' timestamp='1323938219' post='1468782'] I think it was The Killers' guitarist who said that he moved to Las Vegas determined to get in or start a great band and succeed as a musician. Asked whether he had a back up plan he said no, and that having one dilutes your determination because you have a choice. [/quote] A nice story but an example of history being written by the winners. What about all those musicians who did the same thing, with the same determination, with no backup plan, and sunk without trace?

[quote name='redstriper' timestamp='1323913351' post='1468708'] Do whatever you want, if it feels right and it doesn't hurt anyone else. You've got one life to live so forget about money and careers and all that 'real world' crap - join the really real world and set yourself free. [/quote] I entirely agree with the sentiment but I wouldn't dismiss the 'real world crap' so quickly. It's a lot easier to 'set yourself free' and 'do whatever you want' if you can make good money and it needn't mean selling your soul for a lifetime behind a desk. The trick is to use 'the system' to achieve what you want, not just drop out and be severely limited in what you're able to do.

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1323942951' post='1468859'] I think that there are several assumptions being made here about the relationship between education and the world of work. It is not actually necessary for all educational experiences to be targeted at specific careers (e.g. law degree = lawyer, chemistry degree = chemist etc). That is a myth created by the loadsamoney generation. [/quote] That is correct to some extent but the principle can only be stretched so far - although I managed to stretch a biology degree to a career in microelectronics. But my impression is that things are rather more specialised today than they were in the 80s, possibly because so many more people have degrees today so that employers have less need to look beyond the discipline they're recruiting into.

[quote name='Mykesbass' timestamp='1323937275' post='1468769'] IMO, at the rates that the repayments have been set it cannot be regarded as a burden. Also, statistically, as a graduate you will end up earning significantly more throughout your working career which will easily compensate for this. Importantly, the loan does not have any effect on your credit record. [/quote] While I'd certainly agree that student loans are 'a good deal' as far as borrowing money is concerned, it's still borrowing money and it has to be repaid. The point about graduates earning more may be true and I've read an average figure of £100k over a working life, but that doesn't look so good when you have to repay a £50k debt + interest out of taxed income. Of course, that's not a reason not to go to uni, just part of being realistic and making such decisions with open eyes. As for student loans not affecting credit records, loans themselves never do. It's defaulting on loans that affacts credit records. Indeed, a track record of many loans all correctly managed and paid off will enhance a credit record because that's precisely the sort of person banks want to lend to and such a person will have a better credit record than someone who has never been in debt because they'd be an unknown quantity.

[quote name='benebass' timestamp='1323900099' post='1468609'] Throughout history, it's the people who took a few risks that pushed things forward... [/quote] . . . but it's only ever a small proportion of the people taking those risks who ever prospered. History is written by the winners. But if people want to follow their dream then that's great and I would always wish them the best of luck . . . but I'd also hope they were doing so with open eyes and after seriously considering all the pros and cons as well as all the other options that could give them more independence to change their lifestyle in 10, 20, 30 years time. Because it's very likely that their outlook will change over that time. That's all.

[quote name='Slipperydick' timestamp='1323778928' post='1466839'] Modern kit is not a repairer friendly as it used to be, and not as solidly built, but it is more reliable, not entirely because of build quality though, components used are on the whole more reliable as well. As has been said, look at things like TV sets and such, in the 70s they were expected to fail twice a year ( and a good living could be made just repairing them ) [/quote] I'd certainly agree that modern electronics is not as repairer-friendly as old equipment. PTH boards can be more easily damaged than tag-strip constructions while modern SMDs can be a total nightmare. But I'd say that a large part of the "solidly built" issue is to do with the nature of the components and design. An old-school valve amp with big heavy power supplies and other discrete components needed to be 'solidly built' simply to adequately support the components, but modern, often tiny, components weigh far less and therefore do not need such 'solid' overall assemblies. I wouldn't call the average smartphone a particularly 'solid' construction but they'd need one hell of a bump to dislodge a component from the circuit board - in fact I'd bet such a thing would not happen before the thing was totally destroyed anyway. However, an amp full of valves and other heavy big and components needs a good degree of solidity just to hold things in place when bumped about because the soldered joints alone were not strong enough.

[quote name='Len_derby' timestamp='1323808597' post='1467445'] The world is by and large a much safer, friendlier and happier place than governments and the people trying to peddle us things would like us to think. [/quote] Yep, that's my experience too.