Knight of Swords

My main drawback about lessons is the regularity of say, every Tuesday you have your bass lesson. I'm quite happy to practice in my own time, but as soon as I have to practice something for a certain date, I can't be arsed doing it. I also found a lot of times, when I've learned an instrument through lessons, I've always ended up playing music I didn't like (put me off the piano for years and I remember getting shit from my sax teacher for learning Zappa stuff instead of the stupid songs in the teacher's crappy wee book). I've never had guitar/ bass lessons though, so I don't know how they tend to be styled.

Texjamm, with what you're saying about the reasons your lessons have helped, I know what you mean. However, all the new stuff you've learned about construction etc have still came from other songs. I reckon it's just the same old thing again that the best musicians are the ones who try and learn as many different styles of music as possible. Lessons are probably good if you don't have access to a broad range of music.

I bet the hun only likes Pete Doherty because of all the Union Jack imagery.

The best thing to do is look for something second hand, because you can get a better bass for less money. If you buy a new bass, don't buy a Squier as someone was saying. The things are shite compared to other bases of that price range. It's always worth checking Yamaha out. Warwick do really good bases, although I don't know what they've got in the starter range. Encore did really good starter guitars, so it's worth checking them out to see if they do the same range for bases. If you buy new, mail order it (always cheaper). Buy a copy of Guitarist and check the adverts there, or check out the websites for The Guitar, Amp & Keyboard Centre - http://www.guitarampkeyboard.com/ and Thomann - http://www.thomann.de/thoiw2_index.html (this company are especially cheap and their own brand is always high-quality German stuff). I think there are a few other websites, Coda & Flying Pig come to mind, but I don't remember the addresses for them.

I wouldn't bother at all with lessons. Get a wee book or something to show you what the notes are, then just play along with your CDs. The bass is relatively easy to pick up as an instrument.

I've been too skint to buy CDs for months, but I got "Birds of Fire" by Mahavishnu Orchestra recently.

Someone used the phrase "inspired a generation" or something like that. To me, that's a euphamism for "this guy is pish, but makes a lot of money".

I agree with most of that, but I don't see what good a complete breakdown of society would do. All that would happen is some other cunts would take over and we'd be getting shit on from them instead of us doing it to them.

Stupidest thing I did was stapled my thumb on purpose.

I was going to say Django, but I'm several months too late.

Don't usually post on threads that have been dead for a while, but I think there's a big case to be argued that Joe Satriani actually spends more time ripping off Jeff Beck than anybody that's already been mentioned. Generally, there's a hell of a lot of really good guitarists who all say Jeff Beck is the best and I personally think he is as well (btw I'm not being arrogant, I'm not a really good guitarist). However, my favourite guitarist is Rory Gallagher.

Good shouts for Billy Gibbons, Gary Moore and Alex Lifeson.

On the net, I met a girl from New Orleans who was coming over here on holiday and ended up meeting with her. She was 26 (before I get accused of any paedophilia). She didn't murder me or molest my cats or anything.

There must be some irony in the fact that we spend money we've made out of oil to go and invade a country with the sole intention of stealing their oil.

I spotted the SNP thing with the Norway post, because it's an argument I've used many times myself in the past. However, all the pricks down my way keep voting Labour (which means you'll either have a Tory government, or even worse, they'll actually get what they asked for).

Gave up on Scottish independence eventually.

Dave.

Reckon you're right about the Cameron/ Fox thing. Also occured to me that Cameron might be using this as a dummy run for a future leadership bid.

With Letwin, I would say the main problem he had against Brown is that anytime he said anything, Brown stole it and claimed it was his idea. Let's face it, Brown's just started from where Ken Clarke left off. At any rate, I think the upper-class twit thing with Letwin is true, but I reckon he's far too good a politician to leave sitting on the back benches.

On Boris Johnson, I disagree quite a lot. Alan Clark, for all he could be very entertaining, was (to be blunt) a nasty wee shite. I don't think Boris Johnson is malicious. I'd also say Dave Davis would be more in line with the populism thing you were talking about (when he said we should bring back the death penatly etc). I think Johnson's a lot smarter than you're giving him credit for. Still, he's probably never going to make it seriously in frontline politics because he does always come across as a big diddy.

One thing I did like was when the story about his affair broke out and he was doing his "inverted pyramid of piffle" bit. He quoted Voltaire at one point, and all the journalists then had to point out to everyone that he was quoting Voltaire. It's that student thing "I understand this joke, I must tell everyone." To me, Boris Johnson made a bunch of political journalists look like undergraduates, which I think must take a bit of doing.

I still think the Tories will be back. Labour are going to lose grip at some point and let's face it, look what happened the last time they called in the Lib Dems to back them up (I'd actually really like to see a similar situation again, as long as we don't end up with another Thatcher).

Bloody poofs.

I agree, Iran never does anything bad.

LOL.

Tell you one thing though, I think the Labour Party get away with a lot more than the Tories because Labour pretend to be socialists whilst the Tories don't bother. People don't seem to feel as guilty backing Labour.

Oh dear. My post was in response to someone saying "PC motherfuckers"' date=' which was itself hardly a constructive contribution. Maybe the reason people get pissed off is because their arguments simply don't stand up after a little scrutiny?[/quote']

Scrutiny? Is that what you call it? I musn't read The Guardian enough.

In any case, you hardly answered my point.

Slightly disagree Dave, I reckon Cameron is the stalking horse, although I can see why you're saying Fox. My disagreement comes from the fact that Fox is better known than Cameron. I would also have Oliver Letwin on the front bench, and would go for Clarke over Rifkind, but ideally, I would have Letwin as leader anyway. Watching him as Shadow Chancellor against Gordon Brown was brilliant. Letwin really knew his stuff, enough even to get Gerald Kaufmann to stand up one time and tell Brown to raise his game, because he was making the Labour Party look bad (although the way he put it was far funnier).

Boris Johnson should be back as a frontline Tory. Than man is exceptionally funny, when you get over his gin-soaked Tory appearance. I also liked Hague and think he should be back. Reckon people have more time for him now than they did when he was leader.

Anyway who thinks the Tories won't be back is seriously mistaken. Probably not at the next election, if they opt for Davis this time, but certainly at the one after.

Ach well, since the Labour Party lean to the right too, we're as well sitting in the middle and voting Lib Dem.

I think I've just discovered why people don't vote anymore.

Another bloody draw for Killie. At least we're still keeping up with Hibs and the huns.

Once again' date=' using "PC" as a form of abuse. Put down the Daily Mail and think.[/quote']

The PC Brigade are the most dictatorial people I've ever had the misfortune of conversing with. Look at what you wrote - "You don't agree with me, you must be ignorant." Then you wonder why people get pissed off with Political Correctness?

Again' date=' that's an issue that's far more complicated than "Arabs supported the Nazis during the war". The Arab states were struggling (and still are to an extent), to find their feet in the modern age, and the ideologies of those in charge in the middle east fit better with the Nazis idealogy better than other western examples. It wasn't so much support, as far as I believe/have read, but a symptom of the middle east's struggle to find a find a balance between secular and religious influences in government.[/quote']

It was because we kept telling them we'd give them independence and didn't, so they hoped if the Nazis won the war, they could strike a deal with them. I actually meant that the post I quoted was too polarised, hence why I said "black and white route".

Middle East Situation for dummies - (includes myself)

Palestinians live in Palestine

Israelies come in and say "Oi' date=' this is our holy land"

Palestinians are persecuteed for years, and many resort to suicide bombings

years pass......

Israelies starting to pull our of Gaza Strip.

and all that.....[/quote']

If we're going down the black and white line, don't forget that the Arabs supported the Nazis during the war.

Everytime someone in Israel is killed because of the fighting, you hear about it in the news, which is really what worries people (same thing that people are afraid of flying, because you always hear about plane crashes in the news. People forget that planes don't really crash very often).

It happens a lot in Israel compared to here, but it's not like an open-pitched battle. I doubt you have anything to worry about, although I probably wouldn't take the bus anywhere.

Cup of tea, anyone?

I've decided to add a bit to that which is entirely my opinion and not historical fact.

The Peace Process is being forced through by the Americans, who want the area to settle down whilst they're in Iraq. The Israelis cooperate because they don't want to look like the bad guys, but they're quite happy for the situation to continue because as long as they are under threat from Palestinians, they feel justified in holding onto the Gaza Strip and West Bank (note this situation where Israel will give the Occupied Territories back when they stop being attacked, instead of stopping the attacks by giving the lands back - this is the main reason why I don't trust the Israeli motives).

The Arabs in general recognise that they can't get rid of Israel and are ready to accept it as a nation state. However, every time the Peace Process seems to be gaining momentum, the Arabs attack the Israelis. I don't think it's the Arabs who are actually doing this. Basically, the Israelis have nothing to lose from a continued state of war, but plenty to gain. The Arabs are are in the oppositte position.

Everyone knows who Cardinal Richelieu is and all that's happened is they've taken his ideas a stage further.