flyfisher

[quote name='icastle' post='1189268' date='Apr 5 2011, 04:48 PM']As you already have a Jack <-> Speakon cable then I'd use that. As long as you only use one cable between the amp and the speaker then you'll be just fine. [/quote] +1 That's what I use and it works fine. I'd prefer speakon-to-speakon but my amp only has jacks for the speaker output. But having at least one speakon connector identifies it as a speaker cable and avoids confusion with jack-to-jack instrument cables.

[quote name='Conan' post='1189056' date='Apr 5 2011, 02:41 PM']I'm quite happy to indulge in a spot of haggling. Unless the ad says "firm price" or "No offers" I assume that it will be OK to slightly undershoot the asking price. The trick is to be bold enough to get yourself a decent saving but not so bold that you offend the seller![/quote] I've never really understood why sellers get offended by what they think of as a low offer - just say "no thanks" and move on. Things have no inherent value, only what people are prepared to buy or sell them for. Even the price of gold fluctuates! If a particular item is only worth, say, £100 to you then it's reasonable to make such an offer. If the seller wants £1000 for it, then that's also a reasonable position to take. In such a case there is clearly no deal to be struck but I can't see why there should be any offence. Everything is negotiable, but not every negotiation ends in a deal.

Yes, I push for rehearsals all the time, but mutual availability of everyone makes it difficult to manage much one than one per week. I also host them as well, so I think I'm doing my bit. Gig-wise, we've got six in the diary between May and the end of august, which might mean 10 for me across both bands, so not too bad really. Perhaps I'd feel better if I could be confident that the set lists would remain over that period of time - we'll see. Still, better playing something than nothing I guess.

[quote name='Happy Jack' post='1188399' date='Apr 4 2011, 09:53 PM']And that's why we have Tribute Bands ...[/quote] . . . an interesting point. I reckon more people must have seen The Bootleg Beatles during their 30 years of touring than saw the original fab four during their entire performing career. Heck, I'd hazard a guess that Macca alone has played Beatles songs to more people than The Beatles ever did.

@ risingson . . . Yes, that's pretty much the scenario I was envisaging. But my current frustration is not that I'm personally bored playing the same old songs. My own feeling is that we should play them more often because I don't feel we're performing to our full ability, but clearly some of the other band members are happy with our current level. I appreciate such issues probably arise in all bands (and I also accept that I might also get bored with repetition after a certain point), but I was just curious how professional touring musicians deal with the same issue - especially as I can't envisage myself ever having first-hand experience in a touring band!

[quote name='BigRedX' post='1187481' date='Apr 4 2011, 10:24 AM']If you're finding it tedious to play the same songs over and over then the songs aren't the right ones for you to be playing.[/quote] I can sort of understand that sentiment, but who would want to listen to their favourite album every day? I guess amateurs have that choice whereas professionals don't (so much). A bit like going to work every weekday but then doing what you really want at the weekend.

Thanks for the cautionary tale - though the manuals for our dynamics' are long gone. Guess I should be able to track down an SM58 manual easily enough though. I think I'll have a little play around with a multimeter to find out what phantom power is doing to the mic connectors on my mixer. Glad that I don't have an expensive collection of exotic microphones to worry about!

I've been cobbling together a multi-track recording set up recently and am learning lots and having great fun. So far, I've only had access to dynamic mics (mainly SM58s and some lookalikes) and the phantom power switch on my mixer has remained firmly in the 'off' position. Last weekend I treated myself to a half-decent large-diaphragm condenser mic (sE x1, bundled with an acoustic reflexion filter) so I'll now need to switch on the mixer phantom power, which only operates across all mic inputs. My understanding is that if non-powered mics are connected using balanced (XLR) cables, then they'll come to no harm. Can anyone confirm that this is a universal rule, or should I check on a mic-by-mic basis? Also, if the mixer also has 1/4-inch jack inputs, can I assume that there is no phantom power applied to these sockets? I just know that, as soon as my back is turned, someone will plug in a mic using an XLR-to-jack cable and, having never used phantom power before, I'm just wondering how paranoid I need to be to prevent any accidental damage.

Interesting. Fair point about the difference between practice (at home) and rehearsal (with the band) and I understand, and follow, that distinction. I also loved the description of rehearsing a new song a few times until it's right and then moving on, making it such that the song has been played wrongly more times than correctly! My frustration is that that's exactly what we tend to do! I also get frustrated when we rehearse a song, a few mistakes are made (by anyone) and, typically, we have a messy ending - whereupon the singer declares "that sounds OK" and we move on to the next song. Clearly, this would be unacceptable for a pro band but with a bunch of mates it's more difficult to manage. I understand the "it must be fun/satisfying" angle, but I guess this is slightly different for different people - but then we're into personalities and I guess we'd all agree that it can be difficult to fnd a bunch of people with exactly the same sort of outlook. Personally, the most satisfying thing is when we really nail a song. Everyone in the band can sense when everything comes together and it's a real buzz - though I worry that's it's only a buzz because it doesn't happen all the time. Surely it should? Still, I guess even the pro bands have bad shows. What's interesting me at the moment is that we're now working on recording all our originals and this is proving to be a very revealing process, because all the mistakes cannot be overlooked and/or forgotten. So we're all having to confront the reality that we're not as tight as some of us think we are! It was particularly interesting to start recording the first few songs without a drummer and using a drum machine as a click track. When it came to recording the real drum parts it was interesting to see the drummer's difficulty in keeping time to the drum machine! :-)

One of my favourite quotations (picked up on BassChat somewhere) is "Amateurs practice until they get it right, professionals practice until they don't get it wrong". The two (amateur) bands I'm in seem to average about 8 gigs per year. We used to play only covers but over the past year or so have put together a set of original songs as well, so we can mix and match depending on the event. In the absence of a looming gig, rehearsals tend to be fairly unstructured 'jams' of new song suggestions, which can be frustratingly unproductive. When a gig is confirmed we start to think about a suitable set list. As the gig gets nearer the pressure mounts and we rehearse more often until we typically do a couple of full rehearsals in the week before the gig. Our gigs are generally well-received and are typically better than rehearsals - I'm sure we all recognise the extra pressure of a live gig that concentrates everyone's attention! But after the gig, we seem to go back to square one - unstructured rehearsals, jamming new songs and hardly ever playing the whole set again. This has led me to wonder if one of the big differences between amateur and professional musicians is the control of their boredom thresholds; i.e. amateurs find it tedious to play the same songs relentlessly and so never become stunningly good, whereas professionals will play (almost) the same songs every night and so, naturally, achieve their full potential. The Beatles are famously supposed to have become a great band during their daily 8 hour stints in Hamburg - how on earth did they maintain their motivation? (arguably they didn't for more than 5 years or so, but I don't think their experience can be regarded as typical!) OK, a bit of a ramble, but I'd be interested to hear other views about this and how other bands handle such things.

[quote name='Clarky' post='1186527' date='Apr 3 2011, 09:38 AM']Isn't it the UV rays that make it pliable rather than necessarily the heat? Which is why the sun works????[/quote] I thought it was UV that affected (destroyed?) the chemical cross-linking in polymers, which leads to brittleness. Given that it's a thermoplastic material then I'd say it was basically heat that's needed. Sandwiching between some substantial plate glass sounds like a good idea while applying a gentle overall heat. Perhaps using an oven on low heat - maybe with the door open?

Seems to me that the covers band phenomenon is well established these days, which, presumably, answers the original question. I remember going to see The Bootleg Beatles on their 20th anniversary tour - that's about twice as long as the original band lasted! Last year I saw them again on their 30th year anniversary tour. There are loads of cover bands on the circuit - and so what? The ones I've seen are pretty good and, quite frankly, I'd rather go to see the likes of The Counterfeit Stones in a small local venue for £25 than fork out £150 to stand among 80,000 other people 100 yards from the real band. But that doesn't mean I don't also go to see originals bands as well - large and small, depending on my prevailing mood at the time. Variety is, after all, supposed to be the spice of life. As I've said before, there is no right or wrong in these matters - only what people like or dislike and are prepared to pay for. Why all the angst?

[quote name='JayPH' post='1186022' date='Apr 2 2011, 06:22 PM']The cable is brand new but it only cost 8 quid so I'll try it with a different one next time I'm at my mates. Do you think I should invest in a more expensive cable anyway? . . . . There's a maplin not too far away from me so i will check those filters out. I'll let you know if I get rid of the nloise[/quote] A more expensive cable is no guarantee for a fix, and it might not even be an instrument cable problem anyway. For the problem in hand a 'good' cable will be one with a well-soldered connections and a good shield. At this stage, I was suggesting changing the cable only to try to isolate the problem. Again, those ferrite filters are no guarantee for a fix. They'll certainly significantly reduce RF interference in the cable - but that might not actually be the problem. Or it might only be a part of the problem. If you eventually isolate the problem to the wireless mouse then the simplest fix might just be to use a wired one, or move the PC away from the amp. Sorry to be vague but interference problems can be a b*gger to find and fix. There's rarely a simple, universal solution. The basic approach is to first change things (e.g. remove cables, swap cables, switch things off, move amp to another room, shorten cables where possible, etc) to try to isolate the cause and then to try some targeted fixes.

[quote name='Blademan_98' post='1185527' date='Apr 2 2011, 07:35 AM']I asked a similar question a while back. As above most agreed that 300watts and a 2x10 was good with a 1x15 extension if it was a bigger club. DI through the PA if any bigger![/quote] That works for me. An 8x10 might look the part but I'd only consider one for a permanent practice room or if I ever get to the stage where I don't have to cart around my own gear (some hopes!).

[quote name='Rich' post='1185343' date='Apr 1 2011, 10:09 PM']Bass solos in jazz... why? Why not? [/quote] Precisely. Surely there are no rights and wrongs in music - only stuff you like and stuff you don't like. Simple really.

Does the problem occur when there's no intrument connected to the amp? Check the earth wiring to the amp. If the interference only occurs when an instrument is connected, check the instrument cable (swap with another) and the instrument earthing/shielding. Interference could be radiated (via the air) or conducted (via cables). Shielding might help with radiated interference, filters might help with conducted. Clip-on ferrite cable filters can sometimes help - Maplin sell them.

If pup surrounds are going for $7k+ then perhaps Clapton should have made his recent sale a 'breaking-for-parts' sale. [url="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12695811"]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12695811[/url]

I wonder where he gets them made? $11,500 should easily cover the necessary tooling and bashing out, say, 100 sets. Can't cost much to nickel-plate screws either. Nice little earner if there are mugs out there with more money than sense. Good luck to him. Long live capitalism.

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='1161284' date='Mar 14 2011, 03:36 AM']Yeah there are a lot of pointless topics. Reality check: Nobody else cares what bass you use, it really won't make any important difference to a performance. What you play is pretty important (many people choose gear over learning) and the skills of your engineer are pretty important whether that's front-of-house or recording, but the bass you were playing is a long way down the list. I doubt this will put a dent in the used market though. We're not especially rational people are we.[/quote] +1 I don't have the experience to know for sure, but it's always been my feeling that a great musician would be able to coax a great performance out of a 'crap' instrument whereas a poor musician won't be improved by the 'greatest' equipment on the planet. The world of photography seems to encourage similar debates, especially the constant Canon vs Nikon vs Leica arguments. Great photos have been taken with ALL these cameras (and more) and great music has been made by different makes of basses and amps (and any other range of instruments/equipment you care to name). People seem to lose sight of the fact that the instrument is just a tool and it takes a craftsman to use one to the maximum effect.

Just give them a copy and let them judge for themselves.

[quote name='Bottle' post='1156694' date='Mar 10 2011, 02:52 PM']Any thoughts for a more permanent solution if this doesn't work?[/quote] Use proper wood glue. Don't use matchsticks (too soft). Let it set overnight. Don't keep fiddling with the screws. My bass is 23 years old and the original strap buttons& screws are still rock solid.

I wasn't even considering the increase-in-value aspects. I seriously doubt it made much difference to the weight anyway - hence the stupidity of disfiguring the bass (whatever it was/is worth).

What a muppet. How much weight was actually saved by wrecking the bass in that way?

Interesting. I've always assumed that the on-stage sound will never be as good as FOH and that the monitors should really be set-up so that each performer can hear enough of the rest of the band to be able to play their part - not to give the same sort of quality mix as the FOH, which the sound guy then mixes to give the audience the best possible sound. Thus the band members instruct the sound guy to give them the monitor mix they want, but the FOH sound is his responsibility alone. Or am I missing something here?