The "boss snobbery" thread got me to thinking about something that bothers me . . .
We all want to get the best sounds we can, and different songs demand different sounds. Well, I have three different basses that I regularly use to practice with, each with their own unique characteristics and sound palette. I could justify using all three basses at a gig, swapping out for different sounds as the songs require.
It's been my experience, though, that other musicians don't pay attention to the bassist, and especially give little consideration to the tone of the bass. For instance, in one band I'm in, we regularly share the stage and equipment with other bands. The guitarist would always take his own amp, but comment to me, "you can just use whatever amp is there." At one other rehearsal, I switched from my usual bass to a different one I've used, and that guitarist commented, "I like the other one better." (I was using my EB-3 on some Cream tunes we were running over . . .)
So, given this background, I'd feel kinda awkward setting three basses out when gigging. It somehow seems . . . ostentatious . . . if you know what I mean? I've gigged shows with other bassists who often have a second bass set up as a backup, and rarely if ever use it. So -- does the concept makes sense? Certainly, someone like Chris Squire might have a half-dozen different instruments on stage with him. But a local cover band bassist?
In the past, I just used one bass -- for years -- plugged into whatever amp I owned at the time. I suspect many or most other bassists do likewise. Now I'm paying more attention to the nuances of myself and other bassists. Hmmmm . . . thanks, TB!
But, for those of you who do use several different basses on gigs -- how many? And how do you justify it, beyond the "sound" argument, which nobody pays attention to anyway?
BTW, the basses, while not budget quality instruments, aren't high-end boutique show pieces, either. Just average instruments, wildly divergent from each other.
We all want to get the best sounds we can, and different songs demand different sounds. Well, I have three different basses that I regularly use to practice with, each with their own unique characteristics and sound palette. I could justify using all three basses at a gig, swapping out for different sounds as the songs require.
It's been my experience, though, that other musicians don't pay attention to the bassist, and especially give little consideration to the tone of the bass. For instance, in one band I'm in, we regularly share the stage and equipment with other bands. The guitarist would always take his own amp, but comment to me, "you can just use whatever amp is there." At one other rehearsal, I switched from my usual bass to a different one I've used, and that guitarist commented, "I like the other one better." (I was using my EB-3 on some Cream tunes we were running over . . .)
So, given this background, I'd feel kinda awkward setting three basses out when gigging. It somehow seems . . . ostentatious . . . if you know what I mean? I've gigged shows with other bassists who often have a second bass set up as a backup, and rarely if ever use it. So -- does the concept makes sense? Certainly, someone like Chris Squire might have a half-dozen different instruments on stage with him. But a local cover band bassist?
In the past, I just used one bass -- for years -- plugged into whatever amp I owned at the time. I suspect many or most other bassists do likewise. Now I'm paying more attention to the nuances of myself and other bassists. Hmmmm . . . thanks, TB!
But, for those of you who do use several different basses on gigs -- how many? And how do you justify it, beyond the "sound" argument, which nobody pays attention to anyway?BTW, the basses, while not budget quality instruments, aren't high-end boutique show pieces, either. Just average instruments, wildly divergent from each other.