LawrenceH

I voted against the whole thing in the end because I think it encourages cliques and ultimately won't really help the mods either. But I was torn because '+1' is so irritating. Can we get rid of the system but also ban '+1'ing? Where did it even come from?

I love this, it's just so weirdly brilliant. Just checked out an interview with him here http://www.bassfrontiersmag.com/quintin-berry comes across as a really cool guy as well. I can't even work out how he's playing the strings.

DI through a pad straight from the speaker leads is another possibility...('spect he used one of them Behringer units with the built-in cab emulator innit)

Does anyone else feel like they're on talkbass?

When is Grand Wazoo going to be along to recommend a wonky-fretted Dingwall eh? Reverse P pickup position might help too so you get more of the lower harmonics on the top string, but it's annoying to mod as an experiment unless the cavity rout's already big enough.

I am that sad These are very useful for a rock-type sound. Before the Behringer bashers jump in I have always found their comps did a decent job live, especially for drums and compared to other budget makes. In terms of tight punch though, they still don't substitute for a drummer who really knows how to tune his kit! I've met lots of drummers who seem to know how to tune a kit but a select few are able/willing to tune almost any kit until it sounds killer. Then the gates become more useful but the comps are almost redundant.

I sold a mint one for I think £350 a while ago. It's quite a good synth pedal but they are simply not worth that money. They track well, but they don't have anything like the filter quality of a proper synth nor are they programmable. They only have about 2 useful sounds and they're pretty low-fi at that. The cases are good but the actual electronics must be worth pence...I'd have an alesis micron or microkorg for that cash! As for £600-odd...

The midget is a very sensitive cab, you could probably drive it with abut 10 watts and it'll come out loud enough to annoy the neighbours. If it were me I'd think about a small practice cab, maybe made around a decent quality (but low sensitivity) 8" driver, and sealed rather than ported. Drive it with the Genz, which surely you can just turn down? You may need to do some rough loudness compensation with the EQ though.

Tbh I love my funk but I'm not really feeling this one, too repetitive in the rhythmic phrasing and doesn't leave enough space for me - I can imagine a lot of players doing something v similar but better. However, the tone is wicked - very Sugarhill.

[quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1320973469' post='1434061'] but... but... 60 pages????????? [/quote] No. It got closed at 60 pages and moved to part 2...for a further 30 pages! Needless to say, it gets pretty repetitive

[quote name='Andyjr1515' timestamp='1321002963' post='1434149'] Great Link! This is, indeed, how I do mine . However, the wood often burns before the covering bubbles so it needs to be done with great care - especially on the edges and in the cut-out curves [/quote] I've posted what I think is a better way before and linked to several times but...the reason the heat gun burns the wood is it is TOO hot. It doesn't actually need to be that hot to soften the poly enough to scrape off with relative ease. I used a tresemme hairdryer on hottest setting to strip a thick MIM poly finish. Soft, easily scrapable but no bubbling, fumes or burn marks. Takes probably a little more patience but for the lack of mess and total lack of burns on the wood it's worth it. That is my only useful contribution to the world of guitar building.

There's a thread on here with a link to a TC document explaining their cheek, but more amusing (though ultimately less informative unless you actually find that same link buried somewhere) is to look at this http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f15/tc-electronics-rh450-quasi-wattage-ratings-discussion-thread-801140/index60.html

That scratchplate is really elegant. I'd be seriously tempted to reuse that. Those crazy-looking oval Delano pickups that Ou7shined flagged up somewhere recently might match the aesthetic nicely.

IMO, just a theory re the looks Fender P, J and MMSR shapes all utilise curves with constant or smoothly altering radii. The more radical designs like the BC Richs, ACGs, have irregular progressions and more abrupt transitions to their shape. I'm not saying that's bad, but it probably gives them less universal appeal that is less resistant to changing fashions. Humans tend to like smooth curves and certain types of symmetry. It's not the only thing we like, but it tends to be quite ergonomic in a guitar/bass - I prefer not accidentally stabbing myself with my bass so a Fender-esque shape is good. As for the sound, a lot of visually unusual custom instruments nonetheless sound to me like a generic custom instrument...smooth, even output with a broad and well-balanced frequency range...but for those same (useful) reasons, lacking in a bit of character compared to a Fender or MM.

One word: [size=6][color=#800080]D[/color][color=#ff0000]I[/color][color=#0000cd]S[/color][color=#00ff00]C[/color][color=#ffa500]O[/color][color=#ee82ee]![/color][color=#ffff00]![/color][color=#008000]![/color][/size]

Dude...what's wrong with dropping an aftermarket pickup in one of these?! They've got good QC, high mass bridges, but are ultimately built to a budget and it's pretty well accepted that the pickups are one area of compromise, and fortunately one that's easily recitifiable. The world is your oyster when it comes to aftermarket pickups, and the changeover would take all of ten minutes. Statutory warranty...hmm yes perhaps but actually if installed competently even that shouldn't be an issue.

[quote name='KiOgon' timestamp='1320692498' post='1430147'] Here's my other miniature P [/quote] Cool! Can you get a micro-miniature P to replace the thumbrest on the miniature P?

[quote name='charic' timestamp='1320686262' post='1430012'] The Rodes do a better job IME than the C1000s. AKG are a great brand but that particular mic just sounds so harsh to me [/quote] I had/have an NT3 which I used to try as well, and it worked well for some stuff but I found the bottom end was a little uncontrollable compared to the C1000s. Neither mic sounded so harsh up top to me as a typical dynamic, though I did used to roll them off but it seemed to retain detail better...but all this is a bit OT. I only mentioned the C1000s because they're the only gen purpose electret/condenser that I'd encounter with any regularity in house kit (usually in those AKG drum mic sets) and I found they did a job when the typical dynamics didn't!

[quote name='holio.cornolio' timestamp='1320665291' post='1429502'] I had always put it down to 'magic wood' combinations, but let's face it, that's just the kind of bollocks we talk when what we actually mean is 'i don't know and haven't given it much thought'! [/quote] Yeah I think it's often attributed to pickups and/or wood but actually I've got that side of things fairly sorted - the growl I'm talking about is more that mechanical thing you can get from almost any bass if you play hard enough, a bit like fret buzz except it's not exactly! I just want it to happen at much gentler playing levels. If it were the frets then logically bridge saddle profiles would play an equal role, but they're probably much less variable (at least for a jazz with stock bridge).

[quote name='charic' timestamp='1320679481' post='1429835'] Fantastic post above, really not a fan of the C1000 on anything though [/quote] Hah well maybe relegating it to kick isn't such a bad thing! I have to say though, those budget electrets became more and more my 'go to' option in situations where a 57/58 or the Sennheiser dynamics weren't doing it, particularly through cheap PAs (funny how 58s in particular can sound so nasty through a cheap PA but really very good into more expensive systems). I'm sure if I'd had some 414s, SM81s or whatever else kit you get at the higher end of the live market the C1000s and similar mics would have been quickly supplanted - they were far from perfect.

I think anyone who's played more than a little will have experienced good and bad engineers, and if they've got a good musical ear will also have a fair idea of roughly where any deficiency in the sound lies, though knowing how to fix it is another matter. A pro engineer will undoubtedly make best use of the available equipment and have a workable approach so I don't see the point in pistols at dawn here - no-one's career was ruined by an internet forum. Plus, most bands in toilet venues aren't really paid much either and a fair chunk of the industry at that level is essentially amateur/semi pro. There are also plenty of engineers at the lower end of the market who're essentially mini one- or two-man production companies, and as a student playing in and booking bands, and organising gigs, I learnt the hard way that a lot of these guys really aren't very interested in the musical/engineering side of things...I won't name names but there are some companies who relied on the fact that student organising committee member turnover is faster than their reputations can spread. Thinking more about Monckeyman and Simon's differing ideas about the kick drum/bass mic - my ears tend to agree with Simon BUT there is an argument that (say) a D112 on both cab and kick, which has a pronounced EQ curve, has two beneficial effects. First, it'll help the sounds blend ie deliberately NOT giving each instrument it's own sonic space, and you get that nice rock effect where the kick becomes part of the attack phase of the bass note. Second, it makes the sound of both predictable which sorts out a lot of badly-tuned/badly voiced/badly played drums and basses. What you lose there and I'd think is important is flexibility. Setting up in a hurry for rock-type music and functions bands it's probably a great one-size-fits-all approach (and as a lowly student doing sound whilst playing in bands D112 on kick made life a lot easier in that respect, same as a 58 on male vox - always sounds the same!). But when I used to do sound for other bands who were playing jazz or more world-type music where you do want that separation, I'd fight against that inherent mic coloration. I wish I'd thought to use a 57 or even a padded C1000. I sitll think based on my experiences as a punter and a player that there are a fair number of working engineers, even doing festivals etc, where they don't listen to enough examples of the genres they end up mixing to be sympathetic to how it's 'supposed' to sound. Overall it's probably a useful reminder that standard practices evolve for a reason and it's good to know what that reason is, to avoid falling foul of it! It's pretty clear that everyone here knows what they're doing and it's more about preferred methodology to get to a similar end-point.

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1320667237' post='1429544'] You want something a bit different, have you considered [url="http://www.delano.de/products.html?&cHash=5126720d85&tx_smtdelano_pi1%5Bcat%5D=1&tx_smtdelano_pi1%5Bseries%5D=14&tx_smtdelano_pi1%5Bstrings%5D=5&tx_smtdelano_pi1%5Bsystem%5D=74"]Delano's Xtenders[/url]? [/quote] I have no idea what they'd sound like, but they'd look the absolute nuts in a 'ray!

[quote name='ironside1966' timestamp='1320627319' post='1429227'] Cut the frequencies you don’t want rather then boost the one you do. Cut the frequencies you don’t want rather then boost the one you do. Our ears are far less responsive to frequencies cuts has they are to boosts. [/quote] Aye, this was kind of what I was getting at if you consider every single step in a bass guitar signal chain potentially introducing a mid cut! [quote name='charic' timestamp='1320622358' post='1429189'] Don't knock mackie! Great kit!! [/quote] Tbf to Mackie I haven't used their newer stuff and I know they made a big thing about the redesigned EQ a few years ago...but the older stuff did not sound pretty, we battled against a CFX desk for years. Upgrading to an A&H GL series desk was a revelation and that's not exactly high end in the grand scheme of things. The Mackie pre-amps were nice and quiet though which I think is why they were popular particularly with home recording. Live, I preferred almost anything else.

I have to wonder with bass guitar, where a 2-pickup set up gives a natural mid-scoop, a lot of onboard active pre-amps AND amplifier pre-amps are voiced with a mid-scoop and then run into a cab with a natural scoop (eg typical mid-bass hump and another sensitivity peak coming up to the cone break-up freqs). How much more mid-scooping does it actually need? Also, all that is obviously much less of an issue live with a high-end desk with sweet-sounding full-parametric EQ across 4 or 5 bands. You can probably make it sound like anything you want. It's a bit more annoying at my lowly playing level where FoH is at most semi-para on 1 or 2 mid-bands (mmm old Behringer/Mackie EQ...not so pleasant when you whack it up!).

Hi all, long-winded post so sorry in advance... I've been chopping and changing various Fender jazz basses for a while, enjoying exploring the different tonal possibilities. All my basses have quite small, narrow frets. Funnily enough the Aerodyne, which according to the Fender website has medium jumbo frets, has the smallest and narrowest of the lot. More so than an 80s Jap, a Jap 75RI and a MIM Classic 70s (this actually has the broadest flattest-topped frets though quite low in height), and definitely a lot more than a friend's US Jazz which for me has that 'holy grail' sound. Anyway, I was wondering if any experienced luthiers here have experimented with different fret profiles, and would care to comment on the effects, if any at all, on tone/how that interacts with feel? Having experimented with different pickups, setups and pickup heights, all my basses have quite a growly sound but to get them to really bite I have to dig in hard. Whereas on my friend's 'magic' bass, that transition you get, where you dig in and it 'clanks' almost like when you pop it, happens when I play only a little harder than normal, is very abrupt and sounds somehow quite compressed which makes it very musically useful. I remember it being evident both when the bass had an almost unplayably high action and after it was set-up to be low and easy. I am wondering if the fret profile could contribute significantly to this, perhaps due to the string rattling against a broad-profiled fret top as opposed to a small, steeply profiled narrow fret. I'm getting close to happy with the basic sounds of my basses but I'd like to be able to replicate this aspect of my friend's bass and would consider the expense of a refret or even a new neck to get there. As I tried to say earlier, it's not really the tone or the feel per se but the response curve of the tone to touch. Thanks all!