flyfisher

Are you certain there's a generator involved? I've played quite a few outdoor gigs in marquees, but they were never in the middle of nowhere and we've always had mains power laid on. I'm not saying that's always the case, but it's certainly worth checking if you can.

That's sort of my point. People tend to judge the quality of a brand irrespective of whether stuff is actually made on the same factory production line. AFAIK, TDK used to make a very high proportion of all the mag tape in the world. Samsung used to make a very high proportion of all the 'glass' for LCD screens and TVs. Etc, etc. A battery is pretty much a battery (chemistry differences aside, of course). Why would Kodak go to a lot of trouble to set up a separate production line in order to badge a cheap inferior one?

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1362414938' post='1999298'] What tops you using...? They may well have a sub connect [/quote] Alternatively, the subs may have a filtered output for the tops anyway (or tops&separate amp in this case). We use a single Mackie SWA1501 sub with two Mackie 450 tops. The main stereo mix from the desk connects to the sub and there are outputs from the sub to each top.

I have great admiration for anyone who is obsessed enough with becoming a successful musician and can devote all their waking hours to practicing their art and honing their skills. But it's not for me. There are so many other things to do in life that I wouldn't want to devote everything to one main thing - even if I had the temperament to do so.

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1362349263' post='1998864'] I've heard it said by a few people that helium changes the timbre of your voice rather than the actual pitch. So all of those higher harmonics which would usually be damped are suddenly audible, making the voice sound much different although the pitch hasn't changed. A quick google would seem to support that - the clearest explanation I could find was here; [url="http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/speechmodel.html"]http://www.phys.unsw...peechmodel.html[/url] [/quote] Interesting article - thanks for that link. The audio file examples were particularly enlightening and quite clearly show that actual pitch doesn't, in fact, change when breathing helium. I reckon my previous post can now be safely ignored.

I'm sure we're all familiar with the pitch change of the human voice after taking a lungful of helium. Helium is lower density than air so the vocal chords are able to vibrate more freely and thus faster, giving a higher pitch to the voice. Wouldn't the same principle apply to a bass string underwater? Except that the density change is vastly more than the change from air to helium so the effect would be to slow the vibration so much that the frequency would become subsonic and thus inaudible.

[quote name='BILL POSTERS' timestamp='1362254284' post='1997698'] Sony ones for me, or maybe panasonic. Still from the pound shop, which charges 95p for two where I go, cos theres a 99p shop next door to it - yeah, as cuthroat as that ! I dont trust Kodak for stuff thats not photographic any more than I'd buy a guitar from Ever Ready. [/quote] Does Kodak actually manufacture batteries though? Or Sony, or Panasonic? Funny thing, branding.

Well, I wouldn't pretend it's Oscar material, but who wants something meaningful and thought-provoking on a Sunday afternoon while cooking the dinner? Having said that, this sequence makes a pretty good point . . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmDjBONCXEo

. . . . Just cooking the Sunday roast while watching the Blues Bros 2000 on ITV4 with a chilled bottle of Chablis. What's not to like?

[quote name='Machines' timestamp='1362324409' post='1998353'] Tried one at Birmingham show last week . . . . even though it was a good deal at £269 [/quote] Doesn't seem like a good deal to me . . . They seem to be advertised pretty much everywhere at £235.

I wouldn't be happy to cancel any gigs already committed to. Things may change in future but existing agreements should always be honoured - IMO anyway. [quote name='warwickhunt' timestamp='1362237099' post='1997384'] Ultimately he is a part-time agent (not paying taxes on this income etc.) who gets us a couple of gigs a few times a year. [/quote] If you don't like the 'agent' putting the squeeze on you, tell him that one of your band works for the tax office and that it wouldn't be a good idea to mess you all about.

Fans in Hertfordshire and North London might be interested in this gig: http://www.hertfordcornexchange.co.uk/Event_Info/262

Never mind the poll, I just wish I was sailing around Antigua right now . . .

Do you have any documentation for the unit? make and model number? Have you looked on the existing speaker to see if the impedance is marked on it? I'd say the answer to your question is almost certainly 'yes', but it can't be absolutly certain without knowing more about the amp itself.

[quote name='xilddx' timestamp='1361995347' post='1994262'] Top 60 of what? Most heard of? [/quote] That was my first thought too. I guess if we define most polls as "top bassist who happens to play on my favourite song or in my favourite band" then it makes more sense. Still, in the subjective world of music, who's to say that's not a reasonable definition for 'top bassist' anyway?

Namrick? http://www.namrick.co.uk/acatalog/Home_Metric_Stainless_Steel__Grade_A2_and_A4__54.html Various head types available but I guess you probably need the slotted pan head type. Otherwise, try seaching for 'machine screws'.

[quote name='xilddx' timestamp='1361901479' post='1992794'] So you're saying it wasn't really worth posting [/quote] Not at all. Once again I'm in full agreement with SteveK in #64 - well, apart from the surrreal tree thing that I couldn't get my head around.

I take it you only like instrumental music then?

I've bought a fair number of items through the marketplace (plus Tees and lanyards), though I've never actually sold anything. That 4% statistic is a bit disappointing so I can fully understand the proposed change. My only concern is that if only 4% of sellers want to pay a small amount for selling through BC then will there be a big drop-off in the number of items for sale? I guess we'll find out in the coming months.

[quote name='xilddx' timestamp='1361881628' post='1992299'] You'd have known had I intended it to be a light-hearted thread It's a serious question [/quote] I agree with SteveK. It's not really a serious question is it, because it'll never happen. Ever. It's like asking people not to write any more poetry. Can't be done. Even the most oppressive regimes in history have not been able to totally subdue people's inherent creativity and desire to commit their thoughts to words or music. So, the question has to be entirely hypothetical. In which case, entirely hypothetical answers are only to be expected and it seems strange to become "troubled" by any of them. There are plenty of things in the world today to get seriously 'troubled' about without inventing hypothetical ones.

Put the 410 on top of another 210 or similar? No need to connect it but it'll look impressive.

Interesting question. Firstly though, it's never going to happen because new music will always be created as long as there are musicians in the world. But, supposing it really did happen, I don,t think it would matter at all, because there is enough music already in existence for people to discover throughout their lives. It was only about five years ago that I 'discovered' Nick Drake. Last year I 'discovered' Cressida and Spock's Beard. I'm expecting to 'discover' a lot more old music before I pop off but it'll all be new to me. From a musical perspective, it doesn't matter WHEN a piece of music was created, it only matters if the person concerned has heard it before. I'd suggest that all this angst about 'new' music is more of a sociological issue than a musical one. Kids use new music as part of their rebellion against the status quo, they are attracted to stuff that has never been before. Also, many people like to dislike stuff simply because it's popular, so they are naturally drawn to new stuff because they think it gives themselves some sort of originality. So there are all sorts of behavioural stuff going on concerning music, but strip all that nonsense away and there's more than enough music already in the world to satisfy our basic musical needs. After all, the time you spend listening to a brand new piece of music is time that you cannot use to listen to a piece of old music and if you never hear that old music how do you know it's not better (subjectively, of course) than the new piece?

All gone.

[quote name='ThomBassmonkey' timestamp='1361618431' post='1988293'] What you're missing is that if we tell people "yes, it's ok to pirate music, go ahead" then give them a pat on the back and send them on their way, more people will do it. It's unavoidable but that doesn't mean it should be encouraged. If as many people as possible are encouraged to buy music then it's good for everyone. [/quote] That's a fair point. I accept that the music industry can hardly approve of piracy. The ironic thing - if that research I previously linked to is correct - is that piracy might actually be something that does encourage people to more actively explore musical output and results in them spending more than they might normally do. Funny old world.

[quote name='ThomBassmonkey' timestamp='1361583422' post='1988068'] How is the music industry not keeping up with technology? [/quote] The music industry is being dragged along by new technology under protest. That's a subtle difference to fully embracing it. [quote name='ThomBassmonkey' timestamp='1361583422' post='1988068'] Kodak went downhill because of the medium they used and promoted becoming outdated. [/quote] Not really. It went downhill because it didn't embrace the [u]replacement[/u] technology. Again, a subtle difference and all the more ironic in Kodak's case because it had actually pioneered digital photography. [quote name='ThomBassmonkey' timestamp='1361583422' post='1988068'] I'm still not sure how you can say that no one is deprived of anything. If you think that piracy is justifiable then presumably you think everyone can justify it. If everyone pirated music then professional recording artists and songwriters would be deprived of a job. A few pirated copies doesn't do a lot of damage but if everyone pirated music instead of supporting the industry then it will collapse. Industries (almost any industry, it's the way of capitalism) are supported by the end consumer. Take away the consumer's money and the industry can't support it's self. Saying "it's not theft because nothing has been removed from the victim's posession" is technically true, but the flip side is that if they own full rights to something and say "you can only own a copy of this on the condition that you pay us a fee" then you listen to it, arguably you've deprived them of that money. Realistically, how do you expect small bands to make money? As Mr. Foxen pointed out, originals bands have a hard time getting paid for gigs and if we don't make money from music sales then where is the income coming from? All that would happen then is that the people with the money (the labels, though I'm sure they'd move into management, booking etc if there was no money in recorded music) would have even more power because small bands won't be able to promote themselves and work their way up until they've got enough fans to do big releases. It's ok if you have money to spend promoting your band just to get some paid gigs, but I doubt many people would have that kind of cash going spare. [/quote] My point about no one being deprived of anything was actually specific to the earlier point made about someone downloading a copy of a vinyl album they already. But since you missed that point, let's go with what you wrote above. The scenarios you describe are based on a load of 'ifs'. IF all those things happened then I tend to agree with your predicted outcomes. But the reality is rather different and all those IFS doesn't seem to be happening to the extremes needed for your predicted decimation of the music industry. I think you're mistaking my points as being supportive of piracy, but they're not. I'm looking at why piracy happens and accepting that it all this moralising and hand-wringing isn't going to stop it. I don't think the music business has yet accepted this and thinks it can use the law to stop it, despite the history of it never having worked ever since people have had the technology to copy things. But this ability to copy things for free has not been the huge disaster everyone continues to predict has it? So why keep banging on about it? Why not move on and deal with the world as it is instead of wishing it was different. The music industry's lack of vision is the reason that Apple is raking in the billions from iTunes instead of the music companies. As for small bands suffering because piracy means less support from the music industry, does anyone really believe this anymore? Digital technology and the Internet means that small bands don' t need the support of the music industry any more. They are empowered today like never before and can create their own stuff, in their own studios, to amazing quality standards and reach out to millions of potential fans. Surely a bit of inevitable piracy is a price worth paying for such capabilities?