The DB needs orange thread strings. DB are realtively quiet. Ever notice there are several DBS in an orchestra?
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.
Pbassmanca
In the pocket n' thumpy. So woody, so greasy...
I've always thought that a tuba, sounds reminiscent of a Jazz Bass with flats, heavily favouring the bridge pickup with the low end boosted on the amp. Personally, I plan on carefully burying a tuba in case I survive the coming apocalypse, so that upon digging it up, I will be able to "acoustically" recreate the tones that once moved booties on dance floors and made heads bob all around the world...
Michael Schreiber
Commercial User
Cool! You're playing there? Have fun and much success! \m/
- Oct 7, 2000
- 18,619
- 38,939
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Musicman basses
True, but I'd love for you (or anyone else) to elaborate on that. Do you think then that there's no problem with re-defining words as one seems fit?
I don't think we're going to stop the evolution of language, but sometimes it does evolve in directions that make it harder to communicate. We can at least try to get those in our surroundings (and maybe the local music scene) to use words in ways that are intelligible to us. In cases like that, I think it helps to occasionally push back, and the "does that mean bassist sitting down?" joke is actually a pretty good way of doing this without sounding pedantic or old.
What @bholder said.
I'll add that I think your drummer is nuts. HE considers that acoustic. I don't know anyone else who would.
It's getting creepy how everyone is starting to make up their own definition of words. It's getting even creepier that others are accepting those definitions.
It has happened for centuries.
"Hussy" actually came from "housewife" and was basically used to describe the mistress of the house.
"Awful" simply means worthy of aw. I used to be as positive as it is negative now.
"Naughty" was derived from "naught" (meaning "nothing"). It simply meant you were the kind of person who had nothing....in other words poor.
"Clue" comes from clew....which was a ball of yarn. I guess unraveling a ball of yarn could equate to a mystery...but that's a bit of a stretch.
"Nice" originally equated to foolish.
"Meat" simply meant food.
A "cheater" was someone appointed by the king to look after land that automatically became property of the king when someone with no heirs passed on.
"Furniture" used to simply mean the supplies contained within your house.
I'm with you though. It's still creepy....which pretty much used to mean "moves with the body close to the ground".
By the way @pklima your drummer is nuts. There's exactly zero "acoustic" about any of the bands you described. While we're at it, "nuts" comes from the original "be nutts upon", which simply means very fond of. Another connection could possibly come from the head being to referred to one's "nutt". And if your are "off your nutt" you might be crazy. Ask me how I know.
Gaolee
Official leathers tester and crash dummy
To me, acoustic is instruments played without amplification.
That said, if my cover band were to do an "acoustic" gig, we'd use an acoustic guitar, some kind of hand percussion, I'd play my normal bass, and the keyboard player would bring one of his keyboards but all of it would be mic'ed or DI'ed to a small FOH system or individual amps and vocals through a small FOH system
That said, if my cover band were to do an "acoustic" gig, we'd use an acoustic guitar, some kind of hand percussion, I'd play my normal bass, and the keyboard player would bring one of his keyboards but all of it would be mic'ed or DI'ed to a small FOH system or individual amps and vocals through a small FOH system
Absolutely. We all do it every day. Nuances of meaning change from person to person. Dictionary definitions come after the fact to try to pin down what the word means in a sort of standard usage, but I suspect language is evolving more rapidly today than it ever has, including plenty of made-up or repurposed words and words borrowed from other languages.
The places I think language needs to be utterly accurate are in contract law, technical docs, medical terminology, etc... In casual daily parlance, it helps if we all know what we mean, but context clues and familiarity with the person speaking are at least as important as the actual words.
Look at the current US president for an example of this. His grammar is awful and his statements are often bizarre, contradictory fragments that don't go anywhere, yet enough people seem to understand him well enough for him to have gotten elected.
I look at grammar and language the way I look at music; there are rules which came after the fact and which are usually good to follow. Strike out into unexplored territory at your own risk. Enough people do so to expand the map of the known territories, but there's always something new to see out there.
- Oct 7, 2000
- 18,619
- 38,939
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Musicman basses
So, not an acoustic gig at all then, really.
I do get the point, but here's a thing ... how small does FOH have to be for it just not to matter?
I mean your vocals could use megaphones...that'd qualify as acoustic.
And why bother even claiming a gig to be acoustic when it's not?
Is that to appeal to some sort of hipster-ish notion that 'acoustic' equals more authentic ... or an attempt to delude a bar owner that he's not getting a fully-fledged rock band in?
Are you likely to get more money or better gigs that way?
Michael Schreiber
Commercial User
Hm... I understood acoustic as the instrument itself sounding nice, already, without electrics - but can be mic'ed.
And unplugged would be without amplification.
Yet, in my "hood" *g*, many would consider acoustic = unplugged, but wouldn't complain if an acoustic session is mic'ed and amplified through PA. Kinda irrational, yet, what else to expect
Like a classical orchestra in the park - in the good ol' days, (really was that way when I was a kid) it was as acoustic and unplugged as can, only the musicians would play in front of a huge clam/shell shaped wall that supposedly focused the reflection of the sound towards us in the audience - and even if not, at least, it looked nice.
Nowadays, it's not just a concert, but an "event" and they got rid of that romantic irrational setup and use a PA, several rows of speaker; each a hundreds of meter apart, so every part of the audience gets some sound, perfectly calcuated - and the ones watching from the sides get a hell of echoes / delays happening. And it's always "a success"... well, I have to admit it is fun, but I do miss the good old outdoor concerts they did back then when the crowd was smaller, but the quality didn't suffer so much.
And unplugged would be without amplification.
Yet, in my "hood" *g*, many would consider acoustic = unplugged, but wouldn't complain if an acoustic session is mic'ed and amplified through PA. Kinda irrational, yet, what else to expect
Like a classical orchestra in the park - in the good ol' days, (really was that way when I was a kid) it was as acoustic and unplugged as can, only the musicians would play in front of a huge clam/shell shaped wall that supposedly focused the reflection of the sound towards us in the audience - and even if not, at least, it looked nice.
Nowadays, it's not just a concert, but an "event" and they got rid of that romantic irrational setup and use a PA, several rows of speaker; each a hundreds of meter apart, so every part of the audience gets some sound, perfectly calcuated - and the ones watching from the sides get a hell of echoes / delays happening. And it's always "a success"... well, I have to admit it is fun, but I do miss the good old outdoor concerts they did back then when the crowd was smaller, but the quality didn't suffer so much.
Not saying I agree, just that this is acoustic these days.So, not an acoustic gig at all then, really.
I do get the point, but here's a thing ... how small does FOH have to be for it just not to matter?
I mean your vocals could use megaphones...that'd qualify as acoustic.
And why bother even claiming a gig to be acoustic when it's not?
Is that to appeal to some sort of hipster-ish notion that 'acoustic' equals more authentic ... or an attempt to delude a bar owner that he's not getting a fully-fledged rock band in?
Are you likely to get more money or better gigs that way?
I've done a lot of work for weddings as a solo acoustic guitarist/singer. I have counted at least six times when different brides have specified that they wanted a certain song performed as an acoustic version. I know that in each case they meant to say "the instrumental version", but they weren't familiar with the terminology.
