ThomBassmonkey

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1282762' date='Jun 26 2011, 07:22 AM']No, that's a straw man argument that has no relation to anything said so far. If you think the most expertise is found in people that don't even know the names of what they work with then we really don't see eye to eye on what constitutes knowing more than anyone else.[/quote] No, your point seemed to be that because luthiers don't know the names of the woods (something that I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing with), it makes them unqualified to say whether they sound good or not. I disagree, names are just a label and as long as the luthier has experience with the woods, they could know what it would work with. Expertise and knowledge are different things. [quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1282762' date='Jun 26 2011, 07:22 AM']debate is often contrary, saying the same thing would be agreement.[/quote] You're not debating the topic, you're agreeing with the topic then being contrary to specific posts that have moved away from the topic. The topic's about whether or not older basses sound better than newer ones, yet you're making points about luthiers amongst many other unrelated things. Obviously threads twist and weave, but you seem to have come into the thread, seen that you agree with the general topic, then replied to every post you can disagree with one after another. [quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1282762' date='Jun 26 2011, 07:22 AM']If you don't understand ask, I'll explain it to you. Many people are making non scientific claims and expecting them to be taken as fact. I happen to know a lot about wood and am offering information that comes from more objective sources than people that profit from the myths. I know this can cause a lot of fear in those who are heavily invested in those myths and they will often just try to attack the messenger without ever considering the points made, it's not uncommon. The shaking myth goes back at least 30 years. There is a basic human trait where we assume that any interaction we have with something will be for the better, therefore anything we do to an instrument is by default an improvement. Calling a pickup change an upgrade no matte what the change for example. The problem comes when people get too invested in the myth and defend contradictions as an attack on them. You can see this in all the tone myths. And is why these tone discussions will always have people taking offense and getting upset.Any positive beliefs about an instrument will be perceived as an improvement over playing it without the beliefs. Any good salesman knows this. If it's a history or just your hero once played it they will all have marked effects on ones perception.[/quote] I do understand all that and my last post was basically saying the same thing and it's exactly what I'm trying to point out, you've worded it as though you're making an argument against what I said (like, for example, asking if I don't understand) when in actuality you're agreeing. I'm not trying to start an argument, but I expect a few people will agree that coming into a thread and seeing 4-5 posts in a row all from the same member and all being contrary to whatever's been posted before (however relevant to the topic) isn't great reading. Anyway, carry on, I didn't want to make a big deal about it, I just wanted to make a quick point since a few people seemed frustrated with your posts. I won't go into a long debate over it.

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1282000' date='Jun 25 2011, 11:38 AM']If the argument was luthiers know the most and that's why we believe them is true then your statement would be an argument against that. If it doesn't matter what you know then the appeal to authority argument for luthiers is bogus. Can't really have both working at the same time [/quote] I can play certain chords on guitar that I'd have to look up the name of that fit in with some songs. What you're saying is that because I don't know the name of the chord, I can't know whether or not it sounds good. Knowing the proper name for a wood doesn't change how it sounds or whether or not it'll work. So long as the luthier knows what they're working with and can do the job asked of them, it's not relevant whether or not they know what it's called. Hence they can still have expertise in their craft without knowing the names of the woods they're working with. On occasion you can put up some great posts, but sometimes you seem to be making a real effort to simply be contrary to what people are saying rather than adding to the debate. You seem to be agreeing with the overall jist of the thread that old doesn't equate to better but still somehow seem to be kicking up a fuss by going on a tangent to the actual topic over specific points in a flood of replies to various posts. Back on topic: AFAIK the mystical improvement in sound in older instruments still hasn't been pinpointed to any specific trait. Electric guitars are generally simple things, they're bits of wood bolted together that generate a signal using magnets and metal strings. Science would probably be able to detect any consistent differences between new and old instruments by now and since it hasn't, I can only assume there isn't one. There's all kinds of snake oil around though, even Sandberg (who's basses I love) have a master aging process that includes putting the bass on a machine that vibrates it for several days to try and replicate the natural aging process, I can't imagine it does anything though. One thing that I sometimes attribute it to is that a well played bass [i]can[/i] feel nicer than a new one, older necks especially feel really nice when they're well played in IMO. Maybe the fact it feels better makes you more confident about it and in turn makes you think you sound better. Obviously it'd only work for basses that you're playing, but it's possible.

There's one on here [url="http://www.basscentral.com/musicman/stealth.shtml"]http://www.basscentral.com/musicman/stealth.shtml[/url] (assuming you're looking for a stealth model with black p/g too). 6th bass down.

I haven't used a properly passive bass in a long time, but I found that turning down the tone sapped all the life out of it, same as guitar. EQing from the amp or external EQ kept more of the punch and feel in it whilst still doing the intended job. Maybe it was just the gear I used to use, but I always found that at least.

I can honestly say I've never used the tone on any passive instrument and I've only used the volume to mute it when I'm not playing or on rare occasions to adjust the volume if I'm feeling lazy while practicing and don't want to go to my amp.

[quote name='bigjohn' post='1281014' date='Jun 24 2011, 02:13 PM']It's all a bit pointless this discussion isn't it?! I'd understand if I was buying a bass from you that you didn't want me to take the neck off... but if you didn't know what the body was made of and I wanted to know what it was before I bought it... are you seriously telling me that you'd say no to my request? And that you really consider taking the neck off as major? considering the time you'd (and we) would have already spent investigating serial numbers and comparing photographs and getting forums involved trying to ascertain the model and type of wood? I'd tell you to do one [/quote] To be honest, if you were the kind of person that told me to "do one" because I didn't want to dismantle the bass for someone else's curiosity on the chance they might buy it, I'd be quite happy not to do business anyway. As I said, if someone handed me the cash and then took it apart themselves, taking on the responsibility of not damaging it and doing the actual work, I'd happily let them do it. I'm not going to dismantle an instrument for someone that "might" buy it. If it turned out that I'd mis-advertised it, of course I would accept full responsibility. The join between the neck and the body is probably the most important piece of assembly on a bass. It's also not always the easiest to tell if it's been done badly, so yes, I'd consider it a fairly major job to take the neck off, especially by someone without experience.

I would never let a buyer take the neck off a bass I was selling, neither would I want to do it myself. If the buyer handed over the money, he's welcome to then take the neck off and if it's not what I said it was, I'd let him re-attach the neck and assuming it's back in it's original condition, he'd get his money straight back if he wanted. I would never let someone I don't know do something as major as take the neck off one of [b]my[/b] basses, whatever the circumstance. Though by the same token, I would never buy a £500 bass that I didn't know all the information about so there'd never be any need to remove the neck to identify one of my basses.

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1280656' date='Jun 24 2011, 10:43 AM']Talk Bass has numerous threads doing this, the usual pattern is no one can get it right until the answer is revealed and then all the [i]experts[/i] chime in about how they new that. One of the more famous ones people couldn't tell the difference between a jazz neck pickup and a pbass.[/quote] Yeah, that was what I was getting at. I'm sure the basses will sound slightly different, I don't believe that older=better though.

[quote name='markstuk' post='1279049' date='Jun 22 2011, 09:05 PM']I'm not sure I know of a head that won't drive 8 Ohms...[/quote] Don't a lot of all valve amps struggle with it? i.e. a 4Ohm all valve amp needs a 4Ohm load or it could damage it?Though most have a switch IIRC to change resistance.

Stack vertically. Having the speakers closer to your ear outweights anything else IMO, vertical stacking is better for horizontal dispersion but don't worry about that, plenty of people (myself included) use 4x10s that supposedly suffer from the negative effect on horizontal dispersion from horizontally alligned speakers and it's never bothered me. There's no benefit of putting them horizontally AFAIK.

Yeah, seafoam or surf green. The lighting makes it a little darker.

If you have the means, it'd be interesting to do a blind test. Record the same bass part over the same minimalistic backing track (changing nothing but the bass volume so that it's equal on all the versions) and see which people think is which (and which people prefer).

If that was a USA G&L L2000 for 300 Euros, that's an incredible price. Are you sure it wasn't a "tribute" series made in the east? That's still a good price though, assuming that it all works ok. If I were you, I'd look at MIJ P basses (if you're going for a 4 string), Musicman Subs, Warwick Corvette STDs can be got for roughly your budget as well as G&L Tribute L2000s/2500s.

[quote name='JimBobTTD' post='1279427' date='Jun 23 2011, 10:18 AM']That Sandberg MM5 is [i]lovely[/i]. The GK rigs are a sight to behold. Have you tried plugging your small GK head into the big GK cabs? How does the sound of the neo cabs differ from the traditional ones? I'm thinking of lightening my GK rig so it is more portable.[/quote] Thanks, I just had my first gig with the Ray5 and it's true what people say, the Sandbergs are great basses but despite having a MM pup in the bridge, they don't do the ray sound at all. They're more versatile than the Ray, but better? Comes down to taste. I did briefly try both heads through the neos when I first got the small rig and wrote what I found in [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=131878"]this thread[/url], the comparison between the 2001RB (which is basically the same amp as the 700RB with a different power section and another channel) and the MB Fusion translates across to the cabs (though it's more subtle in the cabs). The neos have a more clangy (if that makes sense ) sound than the RBHs, not that they're thin in any way, the RBHs are very round across all frequencies and punchy, the neos are more scooped with fat bass and very clear high end and still loads of punch, but it's in a more subtle voicing. If you read through that thread, you'll see that I intended to have the light rig for practices and small/acoustic gigs. Now I have my big rig up in the for sale section, so that kinda says how much I'm enjoying it because I do love that big rig. In fact, I might have to use it again at our next big gig to see how it goes with the Ray (and I can be a Flea wannabe for the night haha).

I don't really do any left hand work about the 12th fret in bands, very rarely I'll do a run that goes up past there for the end of a song or in a break down or something but it's not very often. I think I tap up to the 15th fret or so with my right hand, though that's not very common. It doesn't exactly push to the limits of my basses either. I occasionally do a bit of harping when I'm playing about but that doesn't need frets and I don't usually tap off the fretboard then anyway, usually I play in the lower octaves then tap whatever interval I'm using in the next octave.

The red Sandberg is now gone. I'll miss her but she's gone to a good home. There's a new arrival though! MM Ray 5. She's a real workhorse, she's been knocked about a bit but that adds to the charm, looking forwards to the gig tomorrow.

For this guy: [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showuser=8227"]Pete[/url] Just got back from Pete's place, had a great time trying out his basses and nattering to him. I think both of us were a bit shocked we were making the trade as we considered both basses keepers! Really nice guy, he's putting up some Statuses (and a couple of other customs, I forget the name now though) for sale soon, all stunning instruments and a great guy to deal with.

All music's self indulgent to an extent. No one starts playing music without enjoying doing it. If they end up doing it for a career and playing music they don't like, it still started out with something they did for a hobby and I'm sure they'd still play some music because they enjoy it (another band or writing for example). I play some music because it's what I like to play, I play some because it's what people like to hear. I enjoy doing both live though. If I could pick one to earn a living from, I wouldn't have to think twice about it.

[quote name='BigAlonBass' post='1277215' date='Jun 21 2011, 03:51 PM']Nothing silly about having an opinion - [i]not[/i] a prejudice.[/quote] An opinion is usually backed by facts or experience, a prejudice is a dislike either without base or based on something (that should be) irrelevant. Just saying. I've never properly played a SC, I'd love to but I've never had the chance.

[quote name='Darkstrike' post='1277999' date='Jun 22 2011, 12:29 AM']You can have maple, rather than rosewood.[/quote] Yeah I just re-read and realised that, damn you for quoting me before I deleted my post haha. I thought the quote from the original post would explain it better so I just removed my whole post.

By the way, here's the quote from BP on the EBMM forums: [quote]Big Harry has said it is no big deal to make this bass. Big Im sort of calling Harry and the rest out here with respect but here is the tooling alone for the 19mm bass Bridge Tooling $5,000.00 Bobbin Tooling $9,500.00 Pick Up cover Tooling $4,000.00 compensated nut tooling $2,000.00 Total Tooling $20,000.00 Engineering time 100 hrs at $150.00 $15,000.00 Parts about $20,000.00 Total investment for 19mm bass $55,000.00 I have the purchasing department giving me the minimum quantities and our cost for the cost of the actual parts needed....Best guess $20,000.00 in inventory needed..But I will get back to you on this.... I will open this product up for order....For a two week window...You can buy it through shopatron on our site...it will be a single or double h sr5 19mm spacing Black only rosewood or maple fretboard...fretted only Same retail as the SR5. Lets see who is right. If we sell 125 in a two week period I will make them and offer them ongoing basis and send everyone a signed certificate saying they were right. If we cant sell 125 ...will you post an apology to us? Will you give us the benefit of doubt in the future? Will some start considering that there is more to bringing an easy product as some have said to market? Figure it out I will not make a dime it will cost me money to make the 125 based on the tooling and inventory involved. Scotty is setting up the shopatron...Understand that these are binding orders....unless the public fails to order 125...we will be charging your credit card a 50% deposit upon placement of the order. The deposit will only be refundable if the orders fail to meet the 125 Its a big world and we sell Music Man in about 75 countries....If there is a pent up demand we really should sell 500.[/quote] The original can be seen [url="http://www.ernieball.com/forums/music-man-basses/50096-its-ignorance-like-really-upsets-me-5.html#post826037"]here[/url]

Generally (where possible) I have mostly vocals, keys, flute and kick through my monitor. Then some guitar and a little bit of bass to reinforce the amps and so that I can move about without losing too much of me. I find if I'm listening to a "good" mix (i.e. what you'd expect from a CD recording rather than a stage mix), I don't feel the bass and kick drum as well, it's not usually a problem but if I can have that extra beef from them I can relax much more and find it a lot easier to put on a show rather than concentrating on what I'm playing. Our drummer has a cannon of a kick (and snare and isn't afraid to beat the hell out of them) and I use a full stack, so if we're using our own gear (guitarist always uses his own amp), I [b]know[/b] that the sound is going to be good on stage.