Why don't more sellers of basses include sound clips

[Annoying Twit]

One thing that I wonder about reading the "for sale" section is why more sellers don't include sound clips of the basses they are selling. In particular, there's a Cort Fretless Acoustic bass on sale. I was idly plucking the strings of some acoustic basses in a shop a while ago, and was greatly surprised at the different acoustic sounds from very similar looking and sized basses.

Particularly for acoustic basses, I've looked at some, e.g. the poster who was selling a no-brand (I [b]think[/b]) acoustic bass for £50, and who said it had a really great sound. But what sort of sound? Put a mic in front of it and record, and then we know what sort of sound. The same could apply for some of the lesser known electric basses too. At least as far as I'm concerned.

Is it just me not knowing enough about the sounds that different basses make? Or are there other people who would find sound clips on for sale threads a boon? Or is it that getting a good recording is problematic, so that sound clips (for the typical seller) might be misleading.

[BigRedX]

Personally I think sound clips are a bit meaningless.

All they show is how the current player of the bass sounds with their choice of whatever extra gear they have the bass plugged into. That doesn't mean that I'll ever get the same sound even with exactly the same signal path.

The only meaningful sound for me is how the bass sounds with me playing it through my gear in the musical context that I want to use it.

Someone else's playing can't show me that ever.

[ThomBassmonkey]

Not everyone has access to recording equipment and even if they did, does a bass that's recorded through a high end mic into logic actually sound better than one that's recorded on a webcam mic into windows sound recorder? Also how much does the player's style affect the sound at all?

In an ideal world every FS thread would include sound clips, but I don't because of the amount of work involved that ultimately doesn't mean much because of all the variables.

[harvey1-8]

I think a lot of people won't have the means to record a sound clip.

I don't think by not having sound clips it's detracting from a sale. If you're looking to drop some serious wedge on a bass then you're going to do your research.

Acoustics are abit different because there's a smaller market for them. I don't see it as being a problem though.

[XB26354]

I'd be happy to have
1) A decent description
2) A photo or two
3) The seller's location
4) The price

It beats me why some people bother, I mean, can you put less effort into a [b]sale[/b] thread?

Edited July 8, 2010 by XB26354

[ahpook]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='889328' date='Jul 8 2010, 10:33 AM']All they show is how the current player of the bass sounds with their choice of whatever extra gear they have the bass plugged into. That doesn't mean that I'll ever get the same sound even with exactly the same signal path.[/quote]

plus the one

if you consider that the recording you hear might be tarted up with some eq or othe electrickery...

what you hear may not be what you get.

[RhysP]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='889328' date='Jul 8 2010, 10:33 AM']Personally I think sound clips are a bit meaningless.

All they show is how the current player of the bass sounds with their choice of whatever extra gear they have the bass plugged into. That doesn't mean that I'll ever get the same sound even with exactly the same signal path.

The only meaningful sound for me is how the bass sounds with me playing it through my gear in the musical context that I want to use it.

Someone else's playing can't show me that ever.[/quote]
+1
There are too many variables to make a sound clip be of any real use.

[bassicinstinct]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='889328' date='Jul 8 2010, 10:33 AM']Personally I think sound clips are a bit meaningless.

All they show is how the current player of the bass sounds with their choice of whatever extra gear they have the bass plugged into. That doesn't mean that I'll ever get the same sound even with exactly the same signal path.

The only meaningful sound for me is how the bass sounds with me playing it through my gear in the musical context that I want to use it.

Someone else's playing can't show me that ever.[/quote]

Exactly right my friend!!

[Low End Bee]

I'm sure a sound clip of me bashing away with a pick sounding all clanky would put 95%+ of BCers off buying a bass of mine which would sound nothing like that in their hands.

[thepurpleblob]

I have no idea what I would play. I don't know any solo stuff. I'd just embarrass myself

[bassicinstinct]

[quote name='thepurpleblob' post='889425' date='Jul 8 2010, 12:28 PM']I have no idea what I would play. I don't know any solo stuff. I'd just embarrass myself [/quote]


That too!!

[Annoying Twit]

I guess that answers my question. Nobody adds sound clips to their for sale ads, because no-one except for me thinks it's worth doing

[Clarky]

Erm, I haven't a clue how to even go about recording a sound clip! Hasn't stopped me buying and selling an embarrassing number of basses on BC (on third page of feedback )

[ThomBassmonkey]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' post='889558' date='Jul 8 2010, 02:38 PM']I guess that answers my question. Nobody adds sound clips to their for sale ads, because no-one except for me thinks it's worth doing [/quote]

I think you should re-read what people have said.

The general consensus is that many people don't have the gear to do it, those that do all use different gear so you couldn't get an accurate idea of the sound and then everyone plays with varying styles anyway, so there's no way of telling how a bass would sound with your gear and your hands, whatever it sounds like in someone else's set up.

Plus once it's gone into Logic or something like that, who's to say it's not been EQ'd and effected to make it sound better anyway? I know if I was recording something for selling, I'd want to make it sound as good as poss. How good a bass sounds shouldn't come down to how good the seller is at engineering.

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='ThomBassmonkey' post='889572' date='Jul 8 2010, 02:56 PM']I think you should re-read what people have said.

The general consensus is that many people don't have the gear to do it, those that do all use different gear so you couldn't get an accurate idea of the sound and then everyone plays with varying styles anyway, so there's no way of telling how a bass would sound with your gear and your hands, whatever it sounds like in someone else's set up.

Plus once it's gone into Logic or something like that, who's to say it's not been EQ'd and effected to make it sound better anyway? I know if I was recording something for selling, I'd want to make it sound as good as poss. How good a bass sounds shouldn't come down to how good the seller is at engineering.[/quote]

I think I did understand the comments. The fact that the sound could be misleading (in one of several ways) and therefore may be discounted by or mislead potential purchasers, makes the sound samples not very useful or potentially even trouble-making. And hence they aren't worth doing. I may have summed up rather crudely, but I did read all the comments and can see the ranges of opinions.

It would be possible to discuss this further, for example talk about in what types of circumstances recorded sound samples could be trusted, and would or wouldn't be misleading. Etc. But fundamentally people don't want sound samples on their for sale ads, neither buyers nor sellers. Therefore it isn't going to happen. And therefore it's going to be much better for me at least if I allocate the time I could spend discussing the potential minor details of posting sound samples to going off and practicing bass.

I do appreciate the comments, even though they all disagree with me. Hence the smiley.

Edited July 8, 2010 by Annoying Twit

[wateroftyne]

I sold a 70s Fender P on eBay, and posted a little videoclip I made into the auction:

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m8GOgZTvwA"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m8GOgZTvwA[/url]

It shows that the bass:

a ) Really existed
b ) Growled like a good'un
c ) Rang true and clean all the way to thehighest frets

No doubt it also fuelled GAS in prospective buyers... despite my lousy playing. It went for a fair bit more than I hoped.

So... I think it's a good thing. People like to see stuff.

Edited July 8, 2010 by wateroftyne

[OldGit]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='889596' date='Jul 8 2010, 03:31 PM']I sold a 70s Fender P on eBay, and posted a little videoclip I made into the auction:

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m8GOgZTvwA"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m8GOgZTvwA[/url]

It shows that the bass:

a ) Really existed
b ) Growled like a good'un
c ) Rang true and clean all the way to thehighest frets

No doubt it also fuelled GAS in prospective buyers... despite my lousy playing. It went for a fair bit more than I hoped.

So... I think it's a good thing. People like to see stuff.[/quote]

Hummmmmmm
Does make me think ...

[oldslapper]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='889596' date='Jul 8 2010, 03:31 PM']I sold a 70s Fender P on eBay, and posted a little videoclip I made into the auction:

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m8GOgZTvwA"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m8GOgZTvwA[/url]

It shows that the bass:

a ) Really existed
b ) Growled like a good'un
c ) Rang true and clean all the way to thehighest frets

No doubt it also fuelled GAS in prospective buyers... despite my lousy playing. It went for a fair bit more than I hoped.

So... I think it's a good thing. People like to see stuff.[/quote]

I liked this.
You saw a bass, you heard a bass. Liked the way that you can show stuff like "no fret buzz", "intonation" (can be adjusted I know), controls work, etc. and of course, actual condition
Thought the playing was v. funky too nice Rocco style.

I guess you don't have to play anything dazzling, just pluck some strings and turn the knobs to show pup, tonal, volume contrast and play up the board chromatically to show how frets play?
(I'd probably get a mate to play mine if I wanted to dazzle potential buyers )
Think I'll use the old "tube" next time, particularly if it generates a bit more interest.
Thanks,
John

[Clarky]

Sorry to be the village idiot but how do you record a clip for YouTube? I presume you need some form of PC-top camera, recording software and a YouTube account? I have none of these but think it may help me sell my fretless '76 Precision on eBay (sadly no takers on BC). So are the camera and software expensive (maybe there's a free download for the software)????

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='Clarky' post='889713' date='Jul 8 2010, 05:42 PM']Sorry to be the village idiot but how do you record a clip for YouTube? I presume you need some form of PC-top camera, recording software and a YouTube account? I have none of these but think it may help me sell my fretless '76 Precision on eBay (sadly no takers on BC). So are the camera and software expensive (maybe there's a free download for the software)????[/quote]

I use a little Canon point-and-shoot camera that has a video function. Sometimes I edit the clip beforehand, but for something like this I just play it back to check it's OK, and upload it straight to YouTube as an AVI.

[Clarky]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='889715' date='Jul 8 2010, 05:45 PM']I use a little Canon point-and-shoot camera that has a video function. Sometimes I edit the clip beforehand, but for something like this I just play it back to check it's OK, and upload it straight to YouTube as an AVI.[/quote]
Thanks WoT! Scurries off to google 'AVI' (yes I have no idea what that means - I really am the village idiot when it comes to tech-y things )

[Clarky]

[quote name='Clarky' post='889719' date='Jul 8 2010, 05:49 PM']Thanks WoT! Scurries off to google 'AVI' (yes I have no idea what that means - I really am the village idiot when it comes to tech-y things )[/quote]
Oh sh*t, shouldn't have bothered. Wikipedia on AVI (may as well be in Cantonese):

Audio Video Interleave, known by its acronym AVI, is a multimedia container format introduced by Microsoft in November 1992 as part of its Video for Windows technology. AVI files can contain both audio and video data in a file container that allows synchronous audio-with-video playback. Like the DVD video format, AVI files support multiple streaming audio and video, although these features are seldom used. Most AVI files also use the file format extensions developed by the Matrox OpenDML group in February 1996. These files are supported by Microsoft, and are unofficially called "AVI 2.0".

Format
AVI is a derivative of the Resource Interchange File Format (RIFF), which divides a file's data into blocks, or "chunks." Each "chunk" is identified by a FourCC tag. An AVI file takes the form of a single chunk in a RIFF formatted file, which is then subdivided into two mandatory "chunks" and one optional "chunk".

The first sub-chunk is identified by the "hdrl" tag. This sub-chunk is the file header and contains metadata about the video, such as its width, height and frame rate. The second sub-chunk is identified by the "movi" tag. This chunk contains the actual audio/visual data that make up the AVI movie. The third optional sub-chunk is identified by the "idx1" tag which indexes the offsets of the data chunks within the file.

By way of the RIFF format, the audio/visual data contained in the "movi" chunk can be encoded or decoded by software called a codec, which is an abbreviation for (en)coder/decoder. Upon creation of the file, the codec translates between raw data and the (compressed) data format used inside the chunk. An AVI file may carry audio/visual data inside the chunks in virtually any compression scheme, including Full Frame (Uncompressed), Intel Real Time (Indeo), Cinepak, Motion JPEG, Editable MPEG, VDOWave, ClearVideo / RealVideo, QPEG, and MPEG-4 Video.

Metadata
As a derivative of the Resource Interchange File Format (RIFF), AVI files can be tagged with metadata in the INFO chunk. In addtion, AVI files can embed Extensible Metadata Platform (XMP).

Continued use
Since its introduction in the early 90s, new computer video techniques have been introduced which the original AVI specification did not anticipate.

AVI does not provide a standardised way to encode aspect ratio information, with the result that players cannot select the right one automatically (though it may be possible to do so manually).[2]
There are several competing approaches to including timecode in AVI files, which affects usability of the format in film and television postproduction (although it is widely used). An equivalent of the Broadcast Wave extensions, designed to standardise postproduction metadata for wave audio files, has not emerged.
AVI is not intended to contain variable frame rate material. Workarounds for this limitation increase overhead dramatically.
AVI was not intended to contain video using any compression technique which requires access to future video frame data beyond the current frame. Approaches exist to support modern video compression techniques (e.g. MPEG-4) which rely on this functionality, although this is beyond the intent of the original specification and may cause problems with playback software which does not anticipate this use.
AVI cannot contain some specific types of VBR data (such as MP3 audio at sample rates below 32KHz) reliably.
Overhead for AVI files at the resolutions and frame rates normally used to encode feature films is about 5 MB per hour of video, the significance of which varies with the application.
More recent container formats (such as Matroska, Ogg and MP4) solve all these problems, although software is freely available to both create and correctly replay AVI files which use these more recent techniques.

DV AVI
DV AVI (aka DV-AVI) is a type of AVI file where the video has been compressed to conform with DV standards. There are two types of DV-AVI files:

Type 1: The multiplexed Audio-Video is kept in its original multiplexing and saved together into the Video section of the AVI file
Does not waste much space (audio is saved uncompressed, but even uncompressed audio is tiny compared to the video part of DV), but Windows applications based on the VfW API do not support it.
Type 2: Like type 1, but audio is also saved as an additional audio stream into the file.
Supported by VfW applications, at the price of little increased file size.
Type 1 is actually the newer of the two types. Microsoft made the "type" designations, and decided to name their older VfW-compatible version "Type 2", which only furthered confusion about the two types. In the late 1990s through early 2000s, most professional-level DV software, including non-linear editing programs, only supported Type 1. One notable exception was Adobe Premiere, which only supported Type 2. High-end FireWire controllers usually captured to Type 1 only, while "consumer" level controllers usually captured to Type 2 only. Software is and was available for converting Type 1 AVIs to Type 2, and vice-versa, but this is a time-consuming process.

Many current FireWire controllers still only capture to one or the other type. However, almost all current DV software supports both Type 1 and Type 2 editing and rendering, including Adobe Premiere. Thus, many of today's users are unaware of the fact that there are two types of DV AVI files. In any event, the debate continues as to which – Type 1 or Type 2 – if either, is better.

[wateroftyne]

Don't worry about what it is!

It's just the video file... You drag it off the camera like you would an mp3 from a folder. Open up Youtube, select 'upload video', browse to the file, and BINGO!

You're an instant INTERNET SENSATION!

[Clarky]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='889725' date='Jul 8 2010, 05:58 PM']Don't worry about what it is!

It's just the video file... You drag it off the camera like you would an mp3 from a folder. Open up Youtube, select 'upload video', browse to the file, and BINGO!

You're an instant INTERNET SENSATION!

[/quote]


Cool I could be the next Pixie Lott, only fatter, uglier and with male bits (allegedly, I am married so who would know?)

[Annoying Twit]

I have a Canon S3 IS still camera with video function. The camera records video directly to SDHC card. I put the card into a USB card reader I got from the pound shop, and upload to youtube direct from there. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.