flyfisher

[quote name='peteb' timestamp='1389381211' post='2333732'] I don’t think there was much support from the public to bail out millionaire bankers to be honest, even if there was little alternative! I think that the whole affair demonstrated the impotence of the Government when dealing with the banking sector that had become too powerful and the folly of previous administrations who failed to regulate the industry a long time before for fear of angering the golden goose! It also demonstrated the arrogance of the banking sector when they attempted to return to the massive bonus culture, whilst the country is still reeling from the damage that the meltdown that their industry had caused… [/quote] Seems a fair summary to me, though you missed out the arrogance of MPs accepting an 11% pay rise under the same circumstances.

[quote name='UglyDog' timestamp='1389376678' post='2333616'] OK, leaving aside the Sting/Summers argument -- to whom is the royalties system, as it stands, 'unfair'? Who is being penalised if the scribbler is paid per unit shifted rather than by the hour? The artist certainly isn't. So who is? In a nutshell, why exactly is it unfair and who is it unfair on? [/quote] The people paying the royalties, obviously, because they are paying more than would otherwise do if the royalties were lower. Perhaps we should have some sort of inverse royalty scheme, similar to progressive taxation? The more copies sold, the lower the percentage paid to the artist and the lower the retail price. The artist coudl still make a great deal of money from their few hours of creativity and the general public would benefit by having to pay less for (presumably) great pieces of entertainment. Of course, such a scheme would be a non starter. Who ever heard of a mega-successful band ever putting out cheaper albums or cheaper gig tickets because they already have more money than they know what to do with? So, is it really all about the art, or is it actually all about the money?

[quote name='peteb' timestamp='1389358306' post='2333234'] Also, as far as I am aware Mr Holder has never been declared bankrupt then demanded that the taxpayer pay off his debts whilst allowing him to continue to receive his huge royalties… [/quote] How could the banks 'demand' anything of the taxpayers? More likely, I suspect, that they knew full well that they were so important to our current society (however right or wrong we think that may be) that they knew that government would not dare risk the wrath of the general public by letting their puny savings disappear as the banks sank without trace. Would you rather lose your music collection or all your money overnight? I can't see much public support for bailing out a bankrupt former-millionaire musician can you?

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1389361001' post='2333293'] That's the thing, you see. There are MILLIONS of songs out there, a huge chunk of which you can listen to for free. And a huge chunk of those are probably not very good. If you want Every Breath You Take, it's going to cost you. Why? Because people rate it so highly they're willing to pay for it. [/quote] But a huge chunk of those MILLIONS of songs ARE very good. Popularity, however, is a whole different ball game and, arguably, has little to do with how 'good' the music is - as things like X-factor clearly demonstrates.

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1389360778' post='2333289'] Yes! And Noddy and Co. were at least creative, where the only thing 'creative' about banking is 'accountancy'. Banking [i]per se[/i] offers no benefit to society whatsoever, whereas music is good for the soul. In my opinion. [/quote] Fair point, but surely a truly fair scheme of things should be above personal opinons? Also, and I hesitate to defend banking, but I seriously doubt that banking has no benefit to society whatsoever. The trouble with such 'cheap shots' is that when the cheers and laughter die down nothing has been achieved.

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1389358133' post='2333229'] [i]....This thread is another worrying indication that music isn't worth anything anymore....[/i] (WoT) +1 And even more worrying, some of those are musicians!! [/quote] I don't think it's a case of musicians not valuing music, more that they acknowledge the reality of the way the world is working. Denying reality is probably not the best way to figuring out how to deal with it - but maybe true artists don't have to deal with reality [quote name='discreet' timestamp='1389355590' post='2333167'] Isn't that why punk happened - to give everyone the opportunity to get up there and do it, regardless? [/quote] Perhaps it was the start of the slippery slope? Add digital technology for easy copying and then throw in the internet for easy distribution and we have a situation where a previously very exclusive 'club' has thrown open its doors to everyone. The world is awash with music these days - an awful lot of it really, really good - and it has never been more accessible. This is the reality that career musicians have to deal with, like it or not.

[quote name='EliasMooseblaster' timestamp='1389356855' post='2333197'] Aren't their motives a bit different, though? The general assumption - correct or not - seems to be that the bankers who receive these huge bonuses are simply making money-for-the-sake-of-money, and that they are driven by greed, and the knowledge that if they make the bank richer, the bank will make them richer. Much as I can't stand Slade, most people might assume that Noddy, on the other hand, wrote that song more for the love of the music he was making, and probably didn't envision that people would still be singing along to it at the office christmas party 30 or 40 years later. I'm sure that both assumptions are gross oversimplifications, but it might explain that particular quirk of popular opinion. [/quote] Who really knows their motives though? I'm sure plenty of artists only do it for the dream of becoming ludicrously rich, as I'm equally sure the opposite applies and they do it purely for the love of their art. I'm in no way trying to to condone bankers but I am interested in the inconsistencies about how we judge these sorts of things. Perhaps there's a bankers forum somewhere where they all think that banking bonuses are perfectly fine but it's unfair that countless musicians are millionaires from a few hours work 30 years ago? I guess my point is that we all have different points of view but true fairness can only really be attained when things work the same way for everyone no matter from which perspective they are viewed from. Anything else is one rule for some and another rule for others - which is generally only deemed acceptable if you happen to be a beneficiary.

[quote name='urb' timestamp='1389346240' post='2333015'] So in an age when actually selling a physical product - i.e. CD or even a download (which isn't physical) - and there are increasingly fewer gigs for an ever expanding number of musicians - how exactly do you propose people make a living from producing and playing music? [/quote] Well, firstly, I'd suggest that there is no natural 'right' for people to make a living from music. If there really is an 'ever expanding number of musicians' then that alone will make things tough. Secondly, I suspect most people like to see people doing some actual work for the money they receive. So, gigging and touring is one way to make money and I suspect that most people would think the money made was well earned. At least they could see that some work was being done. Conversely, simply having loads of dosh rolling in from a 10, 20, 30 year old song probably seems a bit of a piss-take to the vast majority of people who have to work from 9 to 5 to scrape a living. And I know it was controversial the last time I suggested it, but I reckon this is a large factor in why a lot of people don't think twice before downloading music for free instead of paying a few pounds yet will happily fork out hundreds for a live gig.

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1389344923' post='2332997'] Are you for real? A salesman doesn't get an hourly rate, Bankers bonuses are not based on hours worked. Authors and musicians are paid for the volume of sales and the amount of use of their property. That is right and proper. [/quote] I'm not convinced about 'right and proper' but it is consistent, which is why I find it curious that we're generally happy to slag off bankers' bonuses while admiring Noddy Holder for making half a million, or whatever, every Christmas on the back of something he did 30 odd years ago.

They go well with a personalised number plate . . .

[quote name='alexisonfire' timestamp='1389285861' post='2332399'] I haven't got the balls to go back in if I'm honest! [/quote] Not easy if you really feel like that but that's how people like that get away with such things, which means someone else suffering the same thing later on. It's unbelievably outrageous!

Yeah, but poor old Reg (obviously not 'poor' in a financial sense ) blew it all on UFOlogy didn't he? Still, his money so fair play to him.

As I understand it, PAT testing is only about rudimentary earthing and physical cable condition. It's perfectly possible for PAT testing to pass a piece of equipment that is so poorly designed that it would burst into flames within five minutes of being turned on.

[quote name='Phil Starr' timestamp='1389263516' post='2331973'] There's little point arguing about all this. If any of the places you play are places of work they have to have health and safety representatives by law and these are governed by statute [url="http://www.hse.gov.uk/involvement/whatdoesthelawsay.htm."]http://www.hse.gov.u...sthelawsay.htm.[/url] In addition they have to be covered by public liability insurance and to get this the insurance company may impose conditions like PAT testing. It's all mainly due to fire risks, half the fires in the UK are started by electrical faults. Anyone not fulfilling these duties could potentially go to prison for anything up to life if someone is killed. I'd offer little for your chances if you had stuck a few labels off the internet onto your cables should you end up in court. Faced with criminal liability I'd ask for PAT testing, so someone else took the responsiblity. You can't blame the venues. We don't get our gear tested, I'm not being holy about this. We only do a dozen gigs a year and the cost puts us off. No-one to date has ever asked but if they did then we'd have to do it or turn down the venue. It's a bind but it isn't unreasonable or pointless any more than MOT'ing your car. Like an MOT it's no guarantee the car won't go wrong tomorrow but it's safer than never checking at all. The really bad advice is to fiddle the system or to lie. It's probably something we should all do but to cheat the system is to take all the responsibility upon yourselves, Just as you would driving a dangerous car with a fake MOT. [/quote] Great summary! We don't test our gear either, for much the same reasons, and we've never been asked for certificates. But I'd never go to the trouble of faking anything!

Interesting video, but I wouldn't say it's a particularly 'interesting insight into the music industry'. There are loads of fairly anonymous people turning the wheels of the music industry. In fact, why [u]would[/u] most people know about anything but the end-product? Imagine interviewing people in the street and asking them if they've heard of Carole Kaye, Pino, Jamerson or any number of other people whose work they would know but have never heard of the person concerned. Come to think of it, how many people have heard of Jonathan Ive? Tim Berners-Lee? William Shockley? Carl Djerassi? . . . .

Now that's entertainment Great fun video!

[quote name='simes' timestamp='1389139960' post='2330675'] At 52 yrs old bald and overweight I will never get to play wearing spandex with one foot on the monitor [/quote] That's easily fixed . . . just change your ambition. But that's easy for me to say because I've ever felt the allure of spandex.

Thing is, I know bass players often get a bad press for just standing still and playing, but if I was to start moving around that video would be me. At least I look around and don't just stare at the fretboard - that's dynamic enough isn't it?

Nice story. I've heard similar things from others as well. Funny how music can be a really tough job but a really great hobby.

I refurbed my Ashdown cabs with some corners from Bluearan. Quite a bit of choice: http://www.bluearan.com/index.php?search=corner&submit=Search&masthead=Corners_!amp!_Braces&subheadnew=Corners

If you got a drummer you enjoy playing with then it looks like you're the winner. Wish I was in the same boat.

[quote name='Grassie' timestamp='1389051005' post='2329460'] Lots of interesting comments folks, thank you. I need to add a few things though. . . . . . . . . [/quote] A few?

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1389030240' post='2329049'] Is the little padlock icône, indicating 'Locked', not visible on whatever you're using..? [/quote] Yes, but I don't usually notice it! I know this because I've sometimes tried to reply to a topic only to then find it locked. My fault entirely and I'm not complaining at all, just offering an observation.

[quote name='0175westwood29' timestamp='1389031373' post='2329068'] to be fair tho would each cab be getting 450w, so id pit the 210 on top but im pretty sure that it would be fine, id imagine if you used it on its own with the head it be over loaded aswell andy [/quote] If the amp is rated at 900W into 4 ohms then a good rule of thumb is that it'll deliver 2/3rds into 8 ohms - so about 600W in this case. Thus, the 600W cab on its own will be fine at any volume but the 300W cab would be at risk on its own. Again, probably all OK if used carefully, but the risk is there. It's a bit like the difference between having a red line on a car rev-counter that you have to be careful not to exceed or having a rev-limiter that will make it impossible to do any damage.

Nothing wrong with modular rigs (I've got two ), but it's preferable if you don't have to worry about power handling limitations whatever the combination. But as long as you are aware of the limitations and never forget or never trust anyone else to use it then you'll probably be fine.