|
Got my Speakon problem sorted- turns out the cable had a bad end so they took it apart and put on a new one. Long and Mcquade may be a big box store but their customer service is excellent. In other news, this thing rules. Absolutely destroys my GK on all fronts.
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2010 23:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:00 |
|
|
Since we've been on the topic of amps, I have a question for you all. How useful is an amp and a cab? I'm trying to think of a show I've played at a real venue (more than a coffee shop or restaurant gig) and really needed my amp. More often than not the venue has a decent to good sound system and the amp acts as a personal monitor and the sound guy DI's out of either the amp or my Sansamp pedal. Then for really big shows, the venue often has their own backline that they want you to use. I don't know why, but I find it so odd that my Genz Benz Shuttle 6.0 and 1x12 cab have cut it for every situation I have played. This included ear-plug requiring, loud events. I do agree that there are better sounding amps and cabs; I still have my Glockenklang amp and 4x10s sitting around which sound amazing. But for some reason I can't see how bringing that versus my small Shuttle set-up would be better for me, the band, or the audience. Am I just not rocking out hard enough? Once you can hear yourself does cab size even matter (I think I've only played one place that mic'd my bass cab)? If it is just hearing yourself produce sweet, sweet tone, then then how much does the audience even hear? Am I just being a pushover to the sound guy? Am I missing out or am I just being weird? I don't know! Inform me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 02:37
|
|
|
Juaguocio posted:Got my Speakon problem sorted- turns out the cable had a bad end so they took it apart and put on a new one. Long and Mcquade may be a big box store but their customer service is excellent. quote:In other news, this thing rules. Absolutely destroys my GK on all fronts.  I'll never give up my 800RB unless it dies then I'm just getting a new one.Rifter17 posted:Since we've been on the topic of amps, I have a question for you all. How useful is an amp and a cab? On the topic of size, I believe it was DEUCE SLUICE (back when he was Warwick5s) who mentioned that there are two ways of doubling your volume: double the area of speakers you're using, or doubling the amount of watts. I'm currently working on replacing my convenient aforementioned Avatar 2x12 with a beat-to-poo poo, older-than-I-am Ampeg 610 Classic because I saw Todd "The Rod" Kowalski use one of those on tour and holy poo poo I love it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 05:13
|
|
|
scuz posted:
The 800RB is a really nice amp, and I actually like it a lot better than the 1001RB-II and its ilk. Keep it!
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 06:59
|
|
|
If I wanted to send my bass's signal to my bass amp and cab, but also to a separate guitar amp and (guitar) cab...all I would need is a Y-splitter such as this, right? http://www.loop-master.com/product_info.php?products_id=170 I want to try this if I can get a cheap, decent guitar head...I'm not using it live, so are there any foreseeable issues with this type of setup?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 09:28
|
|
|
Pehther posted:
There's no such thing as talent, there is only hard work, practice, and persistence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 11:10
|
|
|
So I asked about playing Bass and you guys kindly said to just give it a shot and see where the chips fall - I ended up borrowing a bass/amp off my step-dad, which I believe is just old, rather than old-but-good. I thought I'd post it here incase you guys can shed some light? The bass is a Jedson, and looks like an Epiphone SG copy:   Internet research tells me that these are knock-off copies and pretty low quality, but it's got to be worth restringing (still has the originals from 1970-whatever) right? This is the amp, a WEM/Watkins Dominator Bass Mk1 (50w):  What do you guys think?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 11:28
|
|
|
The Will posted:So I asked about playing Bass and you guys kindly said to just give it a shot and see where the chips fall - I ended up borrowing a bass/amp off my step-dad, which I believe is just old, rather than old-but-good. I thought I'd post it here incase you guys can shed some light? If they're flatwound strings (which they look like they are), keep them on. Flats only get better with age. If you do change them out and put on some new roundwound strings, save the flats. Never ever cut them off, just unwind them, coil them up, and keep them for future use. The frets look rusty, I'd take it to a shop and see if they can't clean it up and give it a good setup.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 15:21
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:There's no such thing as talent, there is only hard work, practice, and persistence. I would disagree immensely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 15:22
|
|
|
Scarf posted:The frets look rusty, I'd take it to a shop and see if they can't clean it up and give it a good setup. This should be the default answer to "I'm starting an instrument and got an old hand-me-down/used POS from craigslist". It's usually less than $50 and makes a huge difference. I wish someone had told me this when I started out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 15:49
|
|
|
Scarf posted:If they're flatwound strings (which they look like they are), keep them on. Flats only get better with age. If you do change them out and put on some new roundwound strings, save the flats. Never ever cut them off, just unwind them, coil them up, and keep them for future use. If they really do get better with age, then I'll keep them - but I was under the impression that it was good practise to replace them after a year or so, and I know that these have been in an attic for at least 7 years, and then in a cupboard for 10 years before that. Is there a way to check specifically if these are flatwound beyond comparing pictures? A cleaning/setup at my local guitar shop costs £32 plus strings - is that reasonable? EDIT: there is definately a layer of mucky grime on the fretboard, the strings have dots of rust/dirt and the knobs/frets are almost matt (because this tale of woe isn't yet complete - there are dozens of scratches and big chips out of the body as well) Southern Heel fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Nov 17, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 15:57
|
|
|
The Will posted:If they really do get better with age, then I'll keep them - but I was under the impression that it was good practise to replace them after a year or so, and I know that these have been in an attic for at least 7 years, and then in a cupboard for 10 years before that. Are the strings smooth or do they have little ridges? Flatwounds have a smooth, ribbon-like winding around the core. Where roundwounds have a round winding, making little ridges on the string.  Here's a pic of Roundwound, Flatwound, and Groundwound/Slickround strings. The Groundwound/slickrounds actually start out as roundwound, but are then grinded/sanded flat on the outside.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 16:19
|
|
|
Scarf posted:I would disagree immensely. My completely uninformed opinion is that it requires both sides. It's like drawing...you can learn to do it technically with nothing but practice, but it takes an eye for the medium to produce real artwork. Replace "any musical talent" in my post to "an ear for playing guitar/bass" and I think it's closer to what I meant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 16:33
|
|
|
Scarf posted:Are the strings smooth or do they have little ridges? Flatwounds have a smooth, ribbon-like winding around the core. Where roundwounds have a round winding, making little ridges on the string.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 16:50
|
|
|
MolluskGoneBad posted:What do groundwounds sound like? They're like a perfect middle-ground between the two. No twang/overtones, but still have a good mid range growl/bite. Plus considerably less finger-noise from moving up and down the neck than with roundwounds. I was ALMOST going to say they sound kind of like some roundwounds when they start to lose their brightness, but that isn't really accurate. But some people might make that comparison. Well, at least the Ken Smith "Slickrounds" had those kinds of characteristics. I haven't used any other ground/slick-round strings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 17:14
|
|
|
Scarf posted:They're like a perfect middle-ground between the two. No twang/overtones, but still have a good mid range growl/bite. Do groundwounds feel the same as flatwounds? I never could get used to the smooth texture of flatwounds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 17:15
|
|
|
TyChan posted:Do groundwounds feel the same as flatwounds? I never could get used to the smooth texture of flatwounds. They're smoother than roundwounds, but not as smooth as flats.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 17:16
|
|
|
I found a soundclip of me dicking around from about 3-4 years ago when I first started playing with groundwounds and my drummer wanted to hear what they sounded like. This is through my Lakland 44-02, relatively flat EQ, I think I boosted the mids just a tad, into an Ampeg B2R with a 410 and 115. I really liked the picking sound I got with them and a celluloid pick. Kind of a "doink" sound. Very Mike Gordon-ish from Phish. Which is appropriate considering he actually uses the Ken Smith Slickrounds. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 17:21
|
|
|
Scarf posted:I found a soundclip of me dicking around from about 3-4 years ago when I first started playing with groundwounds and my drummer wanted to hear what they sounded like. This is through my Lakland 44-02, relatively flat EQ, I think I boosted the mids just a tad, into an Ampeg B2R with a 410 and 115.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 17:27
|
|
|
MolluskGoneBad posted:That's a nice tone. I love my Labella flats, but in a couple of contexts I could use something a little brighter. This sounds like a neat middle-ground I should try out eventually. Yeah, my hollowbody is strung up with LB Flats.   I changed my 44-02 to some DR Nickel Lo-Riders though. After a while I started craving some more brightness. But I do have a set of Slicks ready to throw on whenever I need them. Also, I liked the Ken Smiths because they had a pretty good tension on them. Same reason I went with the LBs for my flats... I've always preferred pretty taut strings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 17:35
|
|
|
I play rock and metal with flatwounds. I give no fucks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 20:10
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:There's no such thing as talent, there is only hard work, practice, and persistence. I read a study once (I'll see if I can find it) which concluded that the common factor between noted geniuses was the sheer amount of time they put into honing their craft. Natural talent and affinity can sure make things easier, but everyone needs to put the effort in EDIT: Here's an article about it baka kaba fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Nov 17, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 22:04
|
|
|
Minto Took posted:I play rock and metal with flatwounds. I give no fucks. Steve Harris says what's up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 22:09
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:I read a study once (I'll see if I can find it) which concluded that the common factor between noted geniuses was the sheer amount of time they put into honing their craft. Natural talent and affinity can sure make things easier, but everyone needs to put the effort in Thanks for this. I wish I'd started when I was five...but maybe it's not impossible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 22:36
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:I read a study once (I'll see if I can find it) which concluded that the common factor between noted geniuses was the sheer amount of time they put into honing their craft. Natural talent and affinity can sure make things easier, but everyone needs to put the effort in quote:For example: Simply hitting a bucket of balls is not deliberate practice, which is why most golfers don't get better. Hitting an eight-iron 300 times with a goal of leaving the ball within 20 feet of the pin 80 percent of the time, continually observing results and making appropriate adjustments, and doing that for hours every day - that's deliberate practice. There's no way to get there without putting in the hours, but putting in the hours is no guarantee of greatness, especially without an excellent teacher who can evaluate whether you've been doing "deliberate practice" or tacking problems you don't have or which are not germane to your own progress.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2010 23:47
|
|
|
It's not "Practice makes perfect". It's "Perfect practice makes perfect."
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2010 00:18
|
|
|
MolluskGoneBad posted:This is true to a certain degree, but don't neglect this piece of that same article: Oh yeah, I don't disagree with that - it does mention that many people progress quickly and then plateau, and the article I was trying to find mentions something about needing to find a teacher at your level so you're always progressing in a focused way that doesn't waste your time. I don't think naturally talented people would progress much without the right practice either, although it might be difficult to even identify them as talented at that point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2010 00:42
|
|
|
Flats are just lovely. I can't see myself going back rounds ever. It's pretty hard to find a decent flatwound B string though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2010 02:29
|
|
|
I never got used to roundwounds chewing up my right hand and squeaking under my left (yeah yeah, I'm a wuss with bad technique). Flats are nice but I actually like half-rounds even better. Flats can often feel grippy in their own way and it's nice to have more high end available if you want it. D'Addario makes five string sets in half round and I've found the .130 B quite manageable on a 34" scale; not amazing but also not a huge pain in the rear end. I'm looking at trying a pressurewound set next time I change- way harder to find five string sets of those. I might also brave round windings again to try out a Circle K balanced tension set. I wish they offered pressure wound or flat sets but none are forthcoming so far. As for flatwound B strings, I've heard good things about La Bella, D'Addario, Thomastik, and even Sadowsky. I'm sure you've tried some of those and I know it's very much a matter of individual taste but plenty of players seem quite happy with the available crop of five string flat sets. Have you had bad experiences with any particular brand?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2010 02:54
|
|
|
Ferrous Wheel posted:As for flatwound B strings, I've heard good things about La Bella, D'Addario, Thomastik, and even Sadowsky. I'm sure you've tried some of those and I know it's very much a matter of individual taste but plenty of players seem quite happy with the available crop of five string flat sets. Have you had bad experiences with any particular brand? While I haven't had any experience with the B-string... Thomastik flats have always felt incredibly low-tension and "floppy" to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2010 03:53
|
|
|
Pssht... bright twangy roundwounds for life! (all depends on what kind of sound you want!)
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2010 04:09
|
|
|
I use rounds on my fretless. Flats sound like crap
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2010 04:18
|
|
|
Ferrous Wheel posted:As for flatwound B strings, I've heard good things about La Bella, D'Addario, Thomastik, and even Sadowsky. I'm sure you've tried some of those and I know it's very much a matter of individual taste but plenty of players seem quite happy with the available crop of five string flat sets. Have you had bad experiences with any particular brand? I tune to C and use a pick 99% of the time so my needs are probably different than most people. I like D'addario Chromes for standard tuning but their B string has too much tension for me, and it "clanks" excessively. The TI B string probably won't work for me because the gauge is too big, but I am definitely going to try a set of their flats since low tension is what I look for. I'm currently using a GHS Precision Flat B, and while it's better than the D'addario it's nothing spectacular. I'll probably try a Labella next.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2010 04:31
|
|
|
I'm selling my iPad and I figure that a bass would be a good investment, whether I stick with it or not. The OP recommends an Ibanez GSR200 as an option, but I really quite prefer the look of the SR300. Checking the net for reviews says that the SR300 is a pretty neat piece of kit, but before I think about it I wondered if I could throw it in here for some opinions? EDIT: Am I also an idiot for really wanting the pearl white one?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2010 13:33
|
|
|
Hekat posted:Might you have any of these exercises you could link me to? I've played 5 string for about 5 years now. here are some things I "came up with" (not really) that I practice that have helped me a lot. You can take all of these exercises and apply their concepts to other scales as well. In case you haven't realized yet, you can play these patterns pretty much anywhere on the fretboard. 2-octave E major scale. This is just the basic major scale pattern played twice. Play them up and down. code:code:code:code:code:
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2010 18:22
|
|
|
The Will posted:I'm selling my iPad and I figure that a bass would be a good investment, whether I stick with it or not. The OP recommends an Ibanez GSR200 as an option, but I really quite prefer the look of the SR300. Checking the net for reviews says that the SR300 is a pretty neat piece of kit, but before I think about it I wondered if I could throw it in here for some opinions? I have no experience with the SR300, but Ibanez is pretty good all-around. You can't really go wrong with any of them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2010 19:14
|
|
|
I think the white one looks pretty cool, and it'll probably stand out more too 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2010 23:50
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:I think the white one looks pretty cool, and it'll probably stand out more too I could probably figure this out with a little googling, and I'm admittedly just starting to learn about the bass guitar, but the SR300 is an active bass. What happens without a battery? Does it go passive and sound like the GSR200? I'm still trying to decide which to buy once I have the money. I keep telling myself to keep it simple, but then a nagging voice says "versatility". I agree with the people who say not to get the cheapest thing I can find, and I want some mileage out of my first bass. I like the VM Jaguar and Jazz, and I like the Ibanez GSR200 and SR300. So used my range is 150-200, new will be around 300. Edit: And I'll try to keep my waffling to a minimum...hopefully I'll be able to buy before Christmas. Pehther fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Nov 22, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2010 02:25
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the SR300 and the GSR200 both have passive pickups, and it's the EQ things on each that are active - so they're not actually active basses, and the battery's for the magic EQ systems that you don't need to use. I'm pretty new to bass myself though, just throwing that disclaimer in there! I bought one used from ebay and while I do enjoy it a lot, it has a few issues that I need to try and fix. I think so long as you get a decent instrument it will last you a long time, and if you're looking for suggestions I'm sure people will be able to chime in. Have you actually played the basses you're looking at? It's really worth going to a music store and getting them to let you plug some in, just to play around and get an idea of the sounds they can make. It might help you with your decision
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2010 02:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:00 |
|
|
baka kaba posted:I'm pretty sure the SR300 and the GSR200 both have passive pickups, and it's the EQ things on each that are active - so they're not actually active basses, and the battery's for the magic EQ systems that you don't need to use. I'm pretty new to bass myself though, just throwing that disclaimer in there! It's still considered an "Active" bass. Basses with both active electronics AND active pickups are pretty rare in the mainstream market. Pretty much if it has a battery in it, it's considered active, whether its just the preamp, pickups, or both. And you need to check and see if the preamp can be bypassed and played passive, it's not always the case. Also, if it can, you may or may not have a passive tone control.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2010 02:58
|
|