Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
How important is expensive gear? (from SMG)
- Thread starter M.R. Ogle
- Start date
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
How important is expensive gear?
It is real important to those who make it and to those who sell it.
It is real important to those who make it and to those who sell it.
Last edited:
I'm with Jimmy and some of the others. As long as your gear is dependable and has the capability to work in your band, the price tags on the gear don't matter much.
I don't spend my money on fancy gear for audience members, I do it for me. Expensive gear won't make me a better player, but it makes me feel more confident and comfortable.
I don't spend my money on fancy gear for audience members, I do it for me. Expensive gear won't make me a better player, but it makes me feel more confident and comfortable.
My favourite bass tone is the warwick thumb tone. Since pretty much nothing sounds exactly like it, I was bound to get one. It may be hell of an expensive instrument, but for what I wish to achieve it is the only possible solution.
I do find his style annoying--but there are far more annoying music gear people out there on YouTube.
I do agree with the overall point--we can obsess too much over our sound.
For me, I mostly play at home for fun, but I do like a good sound--but I'm the only one it has to please.
I do agree with the overall point--we can obsess too much over our sound.
For me, I mostly play at home for fun, but I do like a good sound--but I'm the only one it has to please.
I think having nicer gear than you need is a far more enjoyable vice than being a shouty, neckbeardy loser who cares way too much about people doing stuff that doesnt effect you.
...expensive gear isn't important says the YouTube douschebag with $10,000 worth of gear sitting next to him to record a 5 minute YouTube rant.
Right or wrong, I buy and play what I buy and play because I like it. Yes, it really is that simple.
You'd want to be really careful about any emails you sent to him (never when tired or tipsy) to avoid youtube infamy.
In my younger days a venue I played was about 500 yards from my house so I'd put gig bag on shoulder, amp on a trolley and walk. I came back after imbibing once and wondered where my amp was as I was sure I'd left with it. I found it 100 yards back where I'd let go of the trolley. The amp was cheap.
I once found a Peavey guitar amp in the middle of the road.
I didn't get that at all from the video - he seems to be saying that having nice gear is good, but not essential when you can't afford it! I think much of what he says is spot on! If it's out of tune, that's bad. Other than that, few people notice or care, apart from the player. When the player can afford more kit, you buy it. Anyone who buys expensive to impress people is crazy, but I suspect most of us have done it at some point!
I've got a specific cheapo rig just for some of the dive bars I play.I got a used Fender Rumble and a used Squire Jazz, total cost: under$450. Let's just say that the crowds here in Philly are quick with their fists, either to swing or grab anything nailed down. So when the insults and bottles get flying, it ain't about my tone, it's usually over a girl. You don't need a first class ticket to enjoy the ride.
Last edited:
I guess I shouldn't be surprised when people don't "get" or like the frickermeister. He's an enraged character speaking from years of experience in a recording environment. His hatred of useless bassists is absolutely spot on, and I've totally been the useless bassist he spits venom at. Having no delusions about that makes it even funnier for me.
Half empty bottles/cups/cans left in a recording environment, putting people on blast for their inappropriate interactions with business partners (other engineers), wanting to slap someone for cupping the microphone. I think Glenn is the boobies. Abrasive is what his comedic angle. Like it or don't, but just about everything he says is spot on if you are paying attention.
Half empty bottles/cups/cans left in a recording environment, putting people on blast for their inappropriate interactions with business partners (other engineers), wanting to slap someone for cupping the microphone. I think Glenn is the boobies. Abrasive is what his comedic angle. Like it or don't, but just about everything he says is spot on if you are paying attention.
As far as the guy himself and humor... nah, I don't find him funny. Funny is about wit and timing, setting up and surprising the audience with an unexpected punchline. It can be abrasive and vulgar, or not, but just ranting abrasively isn't funny to me. Sometimes I agree with the guy and sometimes I don't, but as far as delivery goes, he's trying too hard without actually being humorous.
As far as the actual subject - I generally agree with him in this video, the audience has no idea what your gear costs and don't notice the subtleties of your tone. At the same time, I do incline towards people who have posted that the audience may FEEL something about your sound that they can't articulate or aren't even conscious of the way you are. They certainly notice when it's too loud.
My wife has commented many times, especially when I take her to see a band she doesn't already know, about not being able to understand what the singer is saying. That's partly just a fact of live performance, of course, especially in loud rock concerts, but I have been to shows where you can hear every word, and it's because you have a really good mix dialed in - including the bass and everyone else, so that the singer's voice has room to be clear in. I went to a show recently where the bass for the opening band was a great thundering boomy mess, while the headliner sat in the mix just perfectly. I'm sure the headliner got the time in soundcheck to have their mix tweaked just so while they just threw the opening act on. Now, my wife didn't notice it until I pointed it out to her. But I think the crowd could feel that one band sounded tighter and more professional than the other, even if they weren't exactly aware of it or know why it felt that way.
A lot of the time, a bad mix just comes across to the crowd as "too loud." It isn't actually volume. One time a band I was in played a family backyard party for my daughter and nephew's high school graduations. We took a break and I was chatting with my sister-in-law, asked her how we sounded and if we were too loud, and she said no, it was perfect. Right then my sister came over and asked if we could turn down, it was too loud. That was a surprise, since I had just been told specifically that we were NOT too loud, so I pressed my sister for more detail of what was wrong. She said the vocals were too "piercing" and it was giving her a headache. So we went to the PA and rolled some highs out of the vocal channel, but did not lower the volume. "How's that?" "Much better, thank you!" SHE didn't know the EQ was not tweaked quite right, all she knew was she was getting a headache. It was OUR job to translate that into making adjustments to the mix.
As far as the actual subject - I generally agree with him in this video, the audience has no idea what your gear costs and don't notice the subtleties of your tone. At the same time, I do incline towards people who have posted that the audience may FEEL something about your sound that they can't articulate or aren't even conscious of the way you are. They certainly notice when it's too loud.
My wife has commented many times, especially when I take her to see a band she doesn't already know, about not being able to understand what the singer is saying. That's partly just a fact of live performance, of course, especially in loud rock concerts, but I have been to shows where you can hear every word, and it's because you have a really good mix dialed in - including the bass and everyone else, so that the singer's voice has room to be clear in. I went to a show recently where the bass for the opening band was a great thundering boomy mess, while the headliner sat in the mix just perfectly. I'm sure the headliner got the time in soundcheck to have their mix tweaked just so while they just threw the opening act on. Now, my wife didn't notice it until I pointed it out to her. But I think the crowd could feel that one band sounded tighter and more professional than the other, even if they weren't exactly aware of it or know why it felt that way.
A lot of the time, a bad mix just comes across to the crowd as "too loud." It isn't actually volume. One time a band I was in played a family backyard party for my daughter and nephew's high school graduations. We took a break and I was chatting with my sister-in-law, asked her how we sounded and if we were too loud, and she said no, it was perfect. Right then my sister came over and asked if we could turn down, it was too loud. That was a surprise, since I had just been told specifically that we were NOT too loud, so I pressed my sister for more detail of what was wrong. She said the vocals were too "piercing" and it was giving her a headache. So we went to the PA and rolled some highs out of the vocal channel, but did not lower the volume. "How's that?" "Much better, thank you!" SHE didn't know the EQ was not tweaked quite right, all she knew was she was getting a headache. It was OUR job to translate that into making adjustments to the mix.
Having expensive gear means little if you end up going to FOH through a $40 DI box, and then getting a non-boomy sound into the DI is the trick. But then I've heard a lot of headliners mixed as boomy messes.
One of the best bass sounds I've heard at an outdoor gig was when I saw REM many years back. But it was the main support act that had the slightly better sound!
how almost everyone here missed his point is simply amazing. So, what he said in essence as I understood it, was "you should be spending more time practicing and less time on gear, most of the audience won't notice your new tubes" what he missed to say was "audience will mostly react to mistakes/good playing, not your fancy new gear". He was soo right. His delivery is something i do not find amusing and honestly his style is irritating.
What is sad that folks here started to take his rant personal and are getting defensive. Play what you like, if you can afford 10K gear and want it , get it. but if you want for the audience to like you, don't expect for the gear to compensate your lack of practice.
everything else was clickbait rant
What is sad that folks here started to take his rant personal and are getting defensive. Play what you like, if you can afford 10K gear and want it , get it. but if you want for the audience to like you, don't expect for the gear to compensate your lack of practice.
everything else was clickbait rant
