Rocky McDougall Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I am wondering how the Fender (Factory) folks would feel about this test? Something tells me that they would not be in favor. What if their best new instruments did not sound as good. What does that mean? Technology has not advanced in 50 years? Rocky "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb, voting on what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb, contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky McDougall Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Another thought. I don't think we could say which sounds better. We could only agree that they sound different. Rocky "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb, voting on what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb, contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanD Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 We could have many basses sampled. Just a guess here, but lets say 20 vintage, 20 new. Then people ahve to pick vintage or new when they hear it! This should be a large enough sample, I will run the numbers on SPSS and see how many participants we would need. Im guessing about 40-50 total is sufficent. TO mythbusters, I would also add that the player would need to be tested blind so he/she would have as little effect on the sound as possible. GREAT IDEA!!! Question? where do the knobs get set? all at full? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeronyne Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by Rocky3840: I am wondering how the Fender (Factory) folks would feel about this test? Something tells me that they would not be in favor. What if their best new instruments did not sound as good. What does that mean? Technology has not advanced in 50 years? Rocky Again, the only way to determine the answer to your last question is to wait 50 years and then compare a bass made today to the vintage one. But all of this, WHILE COMMENDABLE, will not come close to answering anything. 1) As mentioned earlier, there's the issue of sample size. This is a deal-breaker if you are trying to draw any sort of conclusion that applies to basses outside of the two you are testing. 2) The variables are staggering. There are probably a couple hundred more than have been mentioned. Seriously. 3) Define "difference" as it pertains to this experiment. If it's quatifiable, then electronic measurement devices should be employed to detect is. If it's qualitative, then you need to do double blind testing with an appreciable number of subjects 4) To eliminate "feel" from the equation, you need to find a player who is really consistent but cannot discern a well-worn neck from a new one. Does such an animal exist? I'm not saying that this is not a worthwhile endeavor, but it's DANGEROUS to draw a conclusion that may, through constant filtering through various internet avenues, become urban legend. There's enough anecdotal half-truths concerning vintage instruments as it is. "For instance" is not proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanD Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 I will disagree with zeronyne in that; if people can not tell the difference, there isnt one. The sample size that is used by the FDA and psychologists is small when doing experiments. Findings are published with as few as 20 subjects. However it will take a lot of evidence one way or another to make anything certain. I personally just think it would be fun to find out if there is a consistent difference. I dont see 100's of variables, and in social psychology there are often 1,000's if not more. We believe those wak jobs for the most part. As far as the player feeling the neck, you can never get an experiment with 0 extraneous variables. Sometimes you just have to note them and move on. If nothing else, it will be one more piece of urban legend for bass players to talk about while there significant others rub our feet and massage honey into our amazing godly hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanD Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by Rocky3840: Another thought. I don't think we could say which sounds better. We could only agree that they sound different. Rocky maybe make people pick vintage or new? Like true false as they listen to the sound bites. I think I said this before, but maybe not. Jonathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by zeronyne: Originally posted by Rocky3840: I am wondering how the Fender (Factory) folks would feel about this test? Something tells me that they would not be in favor. What if their best new instruments did not sound as good. What does that mean? Technology has not advanced in 50 years? Rocky Again, the only way to determine the answer to your last question is to wait 50 years and then compare a bass made today to the vintage one. But all of this, WHILE COMMENDABLE, will not come close to answering anything. 1) As mentioned earlier, there's the issue of sample size. This is a deal-breaker if you are trying to draw any sort of conclusion that applies to basses outside of the two you are testing. 2) The variables are staggering. There are probably a couple hundred more than have been mentioned. Seriously. 3) Define "difference" as it pertains to this experiment. If it's quatifiable, then electronic measurement devices should be employed to detect is. If it's qualitative, then you need to do double blind testing with an appreciable number of subjects 4) To eliminate "feel" from the equation, you need to find a player who is really consistent but cannot discern a well-worn neck from a new one. Does such an animal exist? I'm not saying that this is not a worthwhile endeavor, but it's DANGEROUS to draw a conclusion that may, through constant filtering through various internet avenues, become urban legend. There's enough anecdotal half-truths concerning vintage instruments as it is. Word. There are way too many variables here to begin to start drawing conclusions that would be worth a damn. It's 'experiments' like this that just take a few people to take stock in that can snowball out of control and become 'fact'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
way2fat Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Maybe if we do it we'll have bass manufacturers giving us instruments in hope of receiving the LowDown Seal of Approval. www.ethertonswitch.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanD Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by way2fat: Maybe if we do it we'll have bass manufacturers giving us instruments in hope of receiving the LowDown Seal of Approval. eyebrow raise! EyeBrow Raise EYEBROW RAISE!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
getz out Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 There are way too many variables. How many test basses? Each bass is different, so you are going to gather how many vintage basses as a sample? How many new basses as a sample? You are going to get the set up on each bass to be exactly the same? Assuming you use the same pickups in each bass, how many samples of pickups? Pickups certainly sound different from one another. Trying to quantify the unquantifiable can be interesting but it is not science. These things are a matter of opinion; trying to answer this question, you might as well do a test to see what is better, a Jazz bass or a Precision bass. Mythbusters could test the resonance of a piece of wood, but again, that is not going to answer many questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruiser_dup2 Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by dnkritr: The sample size that is used by the FDA and psychologists is small when doing experiments. Findings are published with as few as 20 subjects. That's because human test subjects are even more expensive than pre-CBS Fenders! Especially if you lose one. . . And medical science is notorious for changing its opinion about various things, probably because they're doing their studies with 20 subjects. Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky McDougall Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 We might equate this to vintage cars. Let's take a 1956 Chevrolet (I had one when it was new) and then compare it to a 2006 Chevrolet. The new car may smell better, ride better, is more comfortable, great air contitioning. It gets much better gas milage and it is an all around, much better vehicle. A new Chevrolet cost about $25,000 and a nicely restord 1956 will cost about $250,000. As you can probably guess, I would choose the 1956 over the 06. Why? Cause it's Vintage. I likes Vintage, I are one. Rocko "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb, voting on what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb, contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenny B Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I remember someone telling me about the Pepsi challenge - after one or two sips, more people would prefer Pepsi, but if they had to drink an entire can, more people would prefer Coke. To make the challenge true, we'd have to jam or play a gig with each bass - what sound sweeter initially more not be so palatable over an evening! The bass player's job is to make the drummer sound good - Jack Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky McDougall Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I think the original thought here was to see if there is any noticable difference between a new bass and a 50 year old bass. Fender is the logical choice for test subjects. All veriables must be the same. The exact same strings transferred from one bass to the other, all pots wide open (or bipassed entirely) and then the sound must be recorded so A/B blind tests could be repeated over and over for listeners. Let's not get this too complicated or it will never happen. Rocky "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb, voting on what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb, contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanD Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by getz76: There are way too many variables. How many test basses? Each bass is different, so you are going to gather how many vintage basses as a sample? How many new basses as a sample? You are going to get the set up on each bass to be exactly the same? Assuming you use the same pickups in each bass, how many samples of pickups? Pickups certainly sound different from one another. Trying to quantify the unquantifiable can be interesting but it is not science. These things are a matter of opinion; trying to answer this question, you might as well do a test to see what is better, a Jazz bass or a Precision bass. Mythbusters could test the resonance of a piece of wood, but again, that is not going to answer many questions. Even science seems to be about 90% BS. Physics my @$$. We still use a very old model of an atom. And the model is not the thing and all science acts as just another step or perspective in understanding the topic which it endeavors to understand in full. Sometimes it may come so close that we can not tell the model from the thing it represents, much like the sample rate in Digital Recording. The topic is often (and in my opinion always) a human creation to fill voided time. As the axiom goes, space abhors a vacuum. So we fill our time with arbitrary information that we give meaning in a variety of ways. This (proposed experiment) is just one of those things that I wondered about. If you can find a scientist that says anything is actually PROVED I would be amazed. This is where we get into faith vs, science. Even if this test did prove that vintage basses were no different in sound quality than new one people would still like vintage better because, to me, science is just another ideological structure for people to have faith in. Without having some outside thing to help us see the world it would be a much harder thing to understand. Much like triangulation of position when navigating, without an outside reference point we have no way to know for sure where we are. It is my opinion that this would produce just another perspective on the vintage debate and it wont produce any answers. The only thing that produces answers is a person. As some zen saying goes, who is the master that makes the grass green? how many blades of grass does it take to make a yard? If anyone would like to actually have a converstation along these lines PM me and I would be happy to clarify. I dont think everyone in the forum wants to here/read this type of thing. HA thats some funny poo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
getz out Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by dnkritr: Even science seems to be about 90% BS. Where did you come up with 90%? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanD Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by getz76: Originally posted by dnkritr: Even science seems to be about 90% BS. Where did you come up with 90%? exactly As of 2005, the Department of Understanding Humanity (D.U.H.) found that 67% of all statistics are made up on the spot. Also, IMHO to try and find a single place where you can pick at someones point is not as worthwhile as trying to see the whole, then working together to learn something together. I often find that When someone disagrees with me I want to prove them wrong instead of trying to see it from their perspective and then desiding which perspective seems to fit my specific needs, desires or wants. Also I forgo the attitude of teamwork for that of "im right... no i want to be right... see it my way... your dumb for not seeing it my way." That has never been that worthwhile of an approach for me. But I'll be damned, soemtimes I still do it. Sigh... maybe it will takes years of DUH research to realize I'm not as smart as I want people to think I am. And, in general I dont know that much, if anything, at all. eh, Jonathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeronyne Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Did you happen to actually read what you wrote before hitting submit? You realize that you have now completely contradicted your original post, right? I don't think you want to get into this on this forum. And by the way, before you flippantly misquote "some zen saying", try showing a bit of sensitivity...some of us here ARE Buddhist, and I'm not talking about me. "For instance" is not proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanD Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by zeronyne: And by the way, before you flippantly misquote "some zen saying", try showing a bit of sensitivity...some of us here ARE Buddhist, and I'm not talking about me. Saying does not = quote IMO I have an equal amount of respect for everyone. And I really enjoy what I have experienced of Zen ideas. I dont know who first came up with the sayings I repeated, so it falls into the "some Zen" category within my tiny mind. I wouldnt expect someone who follows Buddhist teachings to take offense easily. I believe the saying goes "what do you do with a gift you do not want? Give it back." That is a paraphrase of dialog from the book Sid Hartha. If you dont like what Im saying dont except it and move on. shrug. I contradict myself all the time because I find holding onto an idea as truth to be silly, just as I hold on to that idea about holding onto ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Wilburn Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Originally posted by dnkritr: Originally posted by zeronyne: And by the way, before you flippantly misquote "some zen saying", try showing a bit of sensitivity...some of us here ARE Buddhist, and I'm not talking about me. Saying does not = quote IMO I have an equal amount of respect for everyone. And I really enjoy what I have experienced of Zen ideas. I dont know who first came up with the sayings I repeated, so it falls into the "some Zen" category within my tiny mind. I wouldnt expect someone who follows Buddhist teachings to take offense easily. I believe the saying goes "what do you do with a gift you do not want? Give it back." That is a paraphrase of dialog from the book Sid Hartha. If you dont like what Im saying dont except it and move on. shrug. I contradict myself all the time because I find holding onto an idea as truth to be silly, just as I hold on to that idea about holding onto ideas. In Russia, the drugs use YOU! Four String Riot the myspaces, we hates it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcr Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Well, this has become incredibly stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cthulhu Fhtagn Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Are we at the point of THIS thread where I can safely ask if Dave Mustaine was better with Metallica than with Megadeth? Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky McDougall Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Hmmmmm! A Buddhist Bass Player. I had not considered that. "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb, voting on what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb, contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whacked Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Originally posted by Social Critic: Does a black vintage '60 Jazz play faster than a black new Jazz Deluxe? No. Just louder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Kamehameha Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Originally posted by Thomas Wilburn: Originally posted by dnkritr: Originally posted by zeronyne: And by the way, before you flippantly misquote "some zen saying", try showing a bit of sensitivity...some of us here ARE Buddhist, and I'm not talking about me. Saying does not = quote IMO I have an equal amount of respect for everyone. And I really enjoy what I have experienced of Zen ideas. I dont know who first came up with the sayings I repeated, so it falls into the "some Zen" category within my tiny mind. I wouldnt expect someone who follows Buddhist teachings to take offense easily. I believe the saying goes "what do you do with a gift you do not want? Give it back." That is a paraphrase of dialog from the book Sid Hartha. If you dont like what Im saying dont except it and move on. shrug. I contradict myself all the time because I find holding onto an idea as truth to be silly, just as I hold on to that idea about holding onto ideas. In Russia, the drugs use YOU! quote:Originally posted by Social Critic: Does a black vintage '60 Jazz play faster than a black new Jazz Deluxe? No. Just louder. "My two Fender Basses, I just call them "Lesbos" because of the time they spend together in the closet."-Durockrolly This has been a Maisie production. (Directed in part by Spiderman) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whacked Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 I saw a thread/poll on Talk Bass comparing a '64 Fender P to a Variax Line 6. The OP thru a wrench in the works by putting new strings on the vintage, very few guessed right Clips and thread link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenfxj Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Originally posted by dcr: Well, this has become incredibly stupid. Yup. Push the button Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy c Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 I played a Variax for about 45 minutes at Bass Northwest on one of my visits to Seattle. Since I own half of the basses which it is supposed modeling, I was a good one to test it. I'm sorry, it wasn't even close. I'm still looking for that cd I made where I played the same part on eight different basses. I'll post it when I find it and see if anyone can tell which one is which. Free download of my cd!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Can I make my guesses now? Before I hear the samples? I really like a challenge! Bass #1: 1974 Ampeg Big Stud Bass #2: 1997 Ibanez SR405, using just the front pickups Bass #3: 1963 Fender Jazz. Burst finish that is mostly worn off. The original ashtray is still on it but the felt is gone and has been replaced with silly putty. Bass #4: 17th century double bass. Made in France by someone who enjoyed wine, cheese, and surrendering. Bass #5: Almost fooled me with this one. 2004 Rogue bass purchased from the San Fernando Valley Guitar Center. Bass #6: 1976 Rick that some dumbass put a Badass II bridge on. Bass #7: early 60's Hofner Bass #8: Your Lull M4V What did I win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcr Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 I'm going to develop & market a Dumbass II bass bridge & make me a million damn dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.