flyfisher

[quote name='aacred' timestamp='1323885395' post='1468290'] (I could go on for ages about how great Brixton is) [/quote] Yeah, it sounds like it. 30 seconds? At 3am? Do these scumbags just materialise out of nowhere? But very glad to hear you're now reunited with your bass. Hopefully the police can track down the culprit(s).

[quote name='Mykesbass' timestamp='1323892095' post='1468487'] 1) the issue of student loans - they don't leave you burdened with debt, they are very sensibly worked out so that they are completely affordable and only repaid when you can afford to repay them. [/quote] Of course they leave you burdened with debt. Instead of having £x to spend on things like buying a house or other trivial things, you have to spend that £x on repaying your loan. That's a debt burden in my book. The only way it's not a burden is if you never earn enough to have to repay it, but who would want to go through their entire life like that? The whole university game has changed and it's no longer the (financially) soft option it was when I went in the late 70s. Not only will it now cost about £50k to get a degree, there are so many people with degrees that their job-hunting value is severely diminished. We can argue all day about whether this is good or bad but it won't change the reality. Chris2112 may have made some harsh comments but the real world is a harsh place. The problem is, when you're 20 or so it's almost impossible to imagine being 30, nevermind 40 or more. You have almost no real life experience (in the sense of being self-sufficient) and it's hard to envisage doing anything for the rest of your life except your current favourite hobby or interest and the thought of a lifetime of work fills you with dread. One approach is to just follow your heart, wherever that may lead, but another is to really think seriously about career prospects. Yes, I know that's a turn-off right there but what you should ask yourself what you want to be doing at 30 or 40. What lifestyle do I want to be living and will my decisions today realistically give me a chance of achieving them? Frankly, I'd be surprised if anyone at 20 really knows what they want to do for the rest of their lives. I know I didn't. Sure, at any given age, most people have a particular interest and once upon a time it was an easy and financially safe decision to choose a degree course based on that interest. But that's not the same as being tied to doing one thing for the rest of your life. The world has moved on and maximising life-choices is the key to real independence throughout life. But therein lies the true nature of the generation gap. Youngsters with insufficient experience to plan the unimaginable decades ahead of them and old farts with all the wisdom that no one wants to listen to because they 'don't understand'. 'Twas ever thus.

Three weeks sounds far too long to me. Last company I worked for offered a lifetime warranty and aimed to turn around repairs within one day. Are they using a proper 'returns authorisation' system whereby they issue you a job number and can track things at every stage of the repair process? They are either not taking this repair seriously or are snowed under with repairs - not a great recommendation either way.

[quote name='paul_5' timestamp='1323712408' post='1466137'] +1, All good amps are worth repairing. Modern stuff (with a few exceptions) are all made really cheaply, using the most economically viable (cheapest) components, as opposed to higher quality 'old skool' technology. [/quote] With respect, that's a load of rubbish. Unless you mean 'boutique' stuff where people spend silly money for the sake of it, things have always been made with the cheapest viable components. Modern stuff is generally made to far higher design and manufacturing standards - they have to be for any reasonable volume production - and the high level of production automation makes reliability far higher these days. I don't notice any great demand for a return to the 'good old days' of 1960s car manufacture and I'm sure many people still remember how unreliable televisions used to be. I've got nothing against nostalgia for old stuff but let's not lose track of reality along the way. ;-)

[quote name='Mykesbass' timestamp='1323694351' post='1465841'] I harbour a bit of a gripe over modern electronic equipment and the fact that it is now so cheap it has become a throwaway item. So old lead solder was harmful to the environment - I bet the problems the amount of X Boxes, PlayStations and Class D amplifiers that have been dumped as they cannot be repaired far outweighs the damage the lead ever did. Rant over! [/quote] It's a rant I also subscribe to. However, if you're handy with a soldering iron it's often possible to fix things for very little cost. The trick, of course, is to determine the fault but the web can often come to the rescue, particularly with high volume consumer items. Last week one of my PC LCD screens died. Well, not completely, the backlight wouldn't stay on for more than a few seconds rendering it completely useless. On a whim, I entered the LCD screen model number and 'backlight won't stay on' into google and found loads of info suggesting it was a common problem due to the failure of one (or more) of four transistors. So, I quickly tracked down an online supplier for the transistors and ordered 10 of them (I have two of the same screens). I replaced the transistors yesterday and the screen is now back to normal. Component cost (including the spares I bought) was less than a tenner. But a commercial repair would probably be around £50 for an hour's labour plus the cost of a replacement board - because few repair shops can handle component-level fault-finding - so probably at least £100 +vat, which would be ridiculous for a 17-inch screen given the price of a brand new one. So, yes, modern consumer electronic goods are basically economically unrepairable. Still, I was pleased to have done my little bit for the environment. A little DIY can go a long way.

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1323605707' post='1464849'] This whole 'I don't take a spare PA... why should I take a spare bass?' argument is weak. If the PA breaks and it's unfixable, you're all in the same boat. Cancelling a gig because the PA has failed is heck of a lot more credible than cancelling it because the bass player hasn't got a bass that works. [/quote] I'm not sure the paying audience would see it that way. Sounds like you're happy to hide behind a big failure where everyone shares the "blame" but not a small one for which you would get all the blame. I'm not criticising that position and can fully understand it. I just don't think it's consistent when the end result is a cancelled gig whatever the the cause.

That widget will certainly allow you to connect both bass and drum machine into a single input . . . but that's not the whole story. A passive guitar gives out a very, very low level signal (similar to mic level) but a drum machine usually outputs a line-level signal, which is much, much higher. An active guitar will output a much higher level signal than a passive one. So the real issue will be balancing the volume levels between guitar and drum machine. You probably know this already but make sure all volume controls are at minimum when you plug everything together into your amp and be careful when first increasing volume levels until you get a feel for how sensitive things are.

[quote name='REDLAWMAN' timestamp='1323536885' post='1464371'] Much like Spey casting..... (and I adore Spey casting...). [/quote] At least Spey casting is only frustrating (for me, anyway) and not physically damaging (usually!).

[quote name='REDLAWMAN' timestamp='1323518845' post='1464107'] I had the pleasure of playing through an Ampeg Heritage SVT-CL for a while. Apart from giving me enduring tinnitus when played only at room-practising level, . . . . [/quote] Tinnitus is a strange form of 'pleasure'.

Seems to be a lot of inconsistency in this thread. I'm not suggesting that a spare PA system is practical, but it would be consistent with the arguments about being professional and being able to ensure the show goes on. I suspect that a lot of people take a spare bass to a gig simply because they happen to have more than one rather than it being a carefully thought out strategy. After all, who cares how professional the bassist has been in duplicating all their gear if the PA fails and the band can't play the gig.

When music stops becoming enjoyable just move on and find something else. There's no fundamental reason why it [u]has[/u] to be pursued. Agonising over such things is the route to unhappiness.

[quote name='JohnFitzgerald' timestamp='1323454167' post='1463648'] Regarding having spare amps, sorry not going to happen. We have a 2.4kw Logic PA. If my amp lies down, I'll be plugged right into my bass channel of that quicker than you can blink. [/quote] And if the PA breaks down?

Yep, simple screws are a waste of time. I'd use standard bolts and self-locking nuts, all fixed through a metal plate on the inside of the cab to spread the load when the cab is (inevitably) rolled into something and the castors transfer all that sideways force onto their fixings. T-nuts are probably easier to fit though, especially if access to the insides is restricted.

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1323429938' post='1463216'] If I'm playing to 200 people who've paid a tenner each to get in, it's my responsibility to make sure I can do what I'm being paid to do. [/quote] Fair point. If I was a pro or semi-pro muso then I'd feel the same way and would have a spare bass at all times (and probably a spare amp in the car as well). But I play for fun in an amateur band so I don't feel overly obliged to to spend too much on duplicate gear. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys, right?

I don't even have a second bass so it's not a decision I have to make for gigs. I also don't take a spare amp. But I do look after all my gear, have never had a failure or even so much as broken a string in over 30 years. I guess I'm not trying hard enough.

I've got three cabs, a 115 and two 210s. To be perfectly honest, I can't really tell the difference between using a 210+115 or a 210+210. I also can't really tell the difference between the two 210s when stacked as 2x2 or 4x1. For smaller gigs I just use a single 210. I avoided a 410 precisely because of the size/weight issues and I'm happy with the flexibility and portabiity of my 'kit of parts'. But as for the tonal differences, I find that I can get what I want by playing with the amp eq whatever cabs I'm using and, in practice, I suspect that the venue itself has more effect on my sound than the cabs I happen to be using. Or I could just be tone deaf.

I've wondered about IEMs as, although we're not particularly loud, I think they would greatly help with monitoring, particularly for the singers. One thing that has always concerned me though is the volume levels through the IEMs themselves. it's one thing to have a ham-fisted desk jockey give you a burst of stage monitor feedback but I think I'd be a nervous wreck if they could do the same thing with my IEMs. I'm sure this danger must be addressed in practice but I don't know how. Can anyone who uses such a system explain how it is all handled? I'm thinking of systems driven from the desk rather than locally controlled by the band members.

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1323075191' post='1458824'] If you listen to the Beatles or anyone of the day, they had usable sounds, but not good ones. [/quote] That's an interesting point and would suggest that The Beatles were so successful and influential because of their music rather than their sound - another indicator of the futility of this sort of debate. After all, we're supposed to be in the music/entertainment business not a science lab. Which brings to mind the story about Dave Davies (Kinks) shredding his speaker cone with a razor blade (or a knitting needle, depending on which of the Davies brothers you believe) to get his 'tone' - a novel form of 'over-processing'? Surely it's all about the music, the feel, the emotion?

Bass-wise, I can't really add anything more to the above excellent posts, but I'd suggest that the OP's basic point can be applied to so many things in life. The more I learn about a subject, any subject, the more I feel there is so much more to learn about it. It seems to be a natural thing to underestimate all the stuff we do know as we become more aware of all the stuff we don't know. In that sense it can sometimes feels as we're making no progress at all, or worse still that we're going backwards - like climbing a small mountain and suddenly being able to see all the other mountains out there. Ignorance may, perhaps, be bliss but it's not as much fun as getting out there and climbing that mountain!

Great stuff - but isn't it typical how most of the band shots managed to exclude the bass player!

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1323013730' post='1458264'] However there is no such thing as a flat amp or speaker no matter how much their manufacturers want to convince us otherwise. "Good" studio and hifi equipment tends to colour the sound in a way that most people find pleasing. However this is completely subjective which is why there are so many different manufacturers of hifi and studio equipment all claiming that theirs has the flattest distortion-free circuit. IMO if it was possible to build a completely flat amplification system most of us would find the sound produced dull and bland. It's those "good" distortions that make our music sound pleasing. [/quote] Exactly. I remember the hi-fi industry advertising systems with a "British" sound, which always made me laugh in much the same way as having bass, treble and other eq controls. The previous point about 'processing' starting with the decision to play with fingers or a pick is also highly valid - that factor alone can make a huge difference to the overall sound. But we all know that some people claim to have 'golden ears' and can hear the difference between brass and steel screws in their bridge, which provides a good living for many audio businesses.

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1322930122' post='1457450'] Dynamic? Condenser? Ribbon? Through which pre-amp? Into digital? Or onto tape? Played back through an SS amp or a little valve beauty? Into headphones or speakers? Which speakers? In what shape of room? And at what height? And where are your ears in relation to the speakers? How tall are you? Have you consumed any alcohol which might affect one's 'top-end' hearing? Are you sitting on a sofa? Leather or cloth? Is there a dog in the room presenting a diffractive surface? I mean - "Use a mic" A frustratingly inexact suggestion if ever I heard one. [/quote] Do I have to spell it out? I assumed everyone would understand I was referring to a 'basic' mic of course . . . into a basic pre-amp and then recorded onto a basic recorder. Replay would, of course, be using a basic amp and basic transducers. The listening room would, naturally, be the basic shape and height and I'd be sitting in the basic listening position on a basic sofa. How on earth else would you expect to be able to faithfully reproduce the basic sound of any instrument? You got me on the dog though.

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1322924135' post='1457352'] The basic sound of the electric bass guitar is easily heard if you pluck/strum it unplugged. [/quote] But that's the acoustic sound of an unplugged electric bass. As mcnach pointed out, that's not the the sound that actually gets amplified and heard. If you really want to capture the sound of an unplugged electic bass then you'd need to use a mic. So already we have a conflict in the definition of the 'basic sound'. This is why it's a futile debate. Especially as it doesn't matter (see rule 2 )

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1322917291' post='1457256'] But I'm wondering whether we've developed away from the basic sound of a guitar and can accept nothing other than a processed version of it now. [/quote] Thing is, what's the 'basic sound' of a guitar? Acoustic guitars clearly make their own sound but an electric bass (or anything else) has no basic sound of its own and relies on amplification, so what sort of amplification would constitute a 'basic sound'? We all know that clinically-pure hi-fidelity amplification is not particularly popular with electric guitars and even the most basic amp will contain extensive eq capability - and that's before we even consider effects pedals. And even if, by some miracle of human consensus, everyone could agree on [u]the[/u] 'basic sound' of an electric guitar you can bet that someone somewhere would come up with some widget that changed that sound. And if if people liked the sound of it and it caught on . . . . well, I'd guess someone would start a discussion about whatever happened to that original 'basic sound'. But I'm sure you're right about people getting used to a particular sound and I've heard this given as a reason for the differences between vinyl and CDs - the sound differences are not so much as consequence of the medium, or even analogue-vs-digital, but more to do with how things are processed. But whatever the real reason, unsurprisingly some people prefer one medium over the other. Same as the digital-vs-film debates in photography and video-vs-film in cinema. Rule 1 - there are no rules (except rule 2) Rule 2 - you like the end result or you don't Vive le différence.

This reminds me of the debate over whether photos should be digitally enhanced or not. I don't have a problem with photo or sound processing/enhancements if they are artistic endeavours where the end result is all that matters. Sure, a documentary photo should be untouched but an 'image' can be created in anyway the artist thinks appropriate. Similarly, if a scientist wants to record the sound of a bit of steel wire stretched along a lump of wood then audio processing is probably not appropriate but a musician generally has a different agenda and wants to create something, in which case why not use any and all available techniques? So, for me, how a sound is created matters rather less than if I actually like it. Isn't that the only thing that really matters when it comes to art?