Musky

They do precision pickups at quite a good price, and I've read the odd comment on various boards about how great they sound but I'm slightly worried that if they really are so good why more people aren't shouting about them. They're British, so I can understand that maybe they haven't made much of a name for themselves in the US. But has anyone had any direct experience of them on a precision, or any other bass for that matter.

It rather depends what you mean by 'vintage vibe'. Vintage precisions don't have the jazz pickup nor painted headstocks, so getting a 60's/70's vintage look would be very difficult. If you just want to relic it try looking [url="http://www.tdpri.com/resourceRELICING.htm"]here.[/url] There's are plenty of other resources on the net for relicing as well.

Another thing to bear in mind is that taking a job now will make it that much easier to get work in the future. It might not be the line of work you're looking to go into, but your next employer will always look more kindly at someone with a bit of work experience than someone who hasn't.

Inevitably, most of the Musicmasters available date from the seventies, with all the dubious quality control that goes with Fenders of that age. A friend bought one of the guitars in 1980, and it quickly got dubbed 'The Plank', even by people who were playing fairly cheap jap copies. Having said that. I bought one of the Vista series reissues, and it was fairly decent - no doubt helped a little by through body stringing, which the originals didn't have.

[quote name='fleamail' post='14087' date='Jun 8 2007, 11:25 AM']I found this one [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rickenbacker-4003-tuxedo-bass-1987-Nudeswirl_W0QQitemZ190120262729QQihZ009QQcategoryZ4713QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD2VQQcmdZViewItem"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rickenbacker-4003-tu...VQQcmdZViewItem[/url] But why the heck did he striped down a rare bass like this! With the cream finish and the maple fingerboard it would be my dream come true!![/quote] I should imagine that he had no idea about its rarity, and just didn't like the finish. He bought it second hand, before the internet had the kind of resources it does now. I almost butchered an old '68 Rick to make it more to my taste, before I discovered they were actually quite sought after.

Yeah, they're extremely rare. So rare that it may well be a copy that Lemmy's famous for playing. Rick did offer custom options, but I seem to remember Lemmy saying he bought his on the cheap from some dodgy guy. Rickenbacker made a Lemmy signature bass a while ago - so rare that I've never even seen one in the flesh.

[quote name='mhuk' post='12222' date='Jun 5 2007, 12:06 AM']Yeah, but a lot of what? The body, neck, pickups?[/quote] I've never heard anything bad about 70's hardware (other than claims that older pickups sound better), but Fender were known to be rather lax with their tolerances machining the wood. Which meant warped AND twisted necks (I bought one on those - an S6xxxxx serial on a new bass in '81), oversized neck pockets (disastrous if mated to a 3 bolt jazz), heels wider than the neck, generally unlovely contouring - you name it Fender let them slip out of the factory. They also produced plenty of gorgeous, extremely playable instruments. You just can't tell until you get you hands on it.

-->QUOTE(Lenny B @ Jun 4 2007, 11:15 PM) [snapback]12171[/snapback] Is it possible to date a bass to its build month? Somewhere on my GAS list is a Precision, and i thought it would be nice to find one that was the same age as me (august 75) - see which one of us ages better![/quote] The answer is - possibly. A '75 may have a readable inspection date in the neck pocket. Otherwise you'd have to rely on the date the neck was made. See [url="http://www.provide.net/~cfh/fender.html"]here[/url] for details of the codes used.

[quote name='mhuk' post='12158' date='Jun 4 2007, 11:07 PM']It may be just shy of a metric tonne, but can someone tell me specifically what is poor quality about a late 70's Precision?[/quote] Perhaps nothing at all, maybe a hell of a lot. It was the variablity of Fenders quality control up to '81 that led to some real dogs making it out of the factory gate. Also short cuts on the manufacturing process led to Fender messing about with contouring and routing as early as the late 60's (at least on some models).

For me the pricing, in an ideal world, should actually reflect the value of a [i]players[/i] instrument - it's worth as a tool. Obviously that's not the case, and people will shell out for the 'mojo' of owning an older instrument, or for the sheer investment value. After all, they're not making anymore genuine seventies Fenders and the stock of existing ones can only decrease. But the logic seems to be, the older the instrument the better. And that logic is what I'm questioning, especially given the variability of seventies production. There also seems to be a common perception that the price (I'm deliberately avoiding the use of the word 'value' here) of 70's Fenders can only go up. In the short term I'm sure that's correct, but the crash in the classic car market does come to mind. Also can we be sure that, for instance, a five year difference between a '77 and an '82 will hold the same significance to the market in maybe 30 years time. To my mind basses are for playing, yet judging by the prices on ebay many people are happy to play 'pig in a poke' with seventies Fenders by buying based on the year and originality. Fine if you're an investor, maybe not so wise if you actually want to play the thing.

Absolutely. There's no doubt whatsoever that some great instruments came out of Fender during the seventies. It's just that now so much (most?) buying is done via ebay nowadays, there seems to be a greater emphasis placed on the date of a instrument rather than it's playability. When Schultz took over in '81, he tightened up quality control no end. So it's arguable that instruments after this date are more likely to be of better quality.

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='11722' date='Jun 4 2007, 10:54 AM']Bearing in mind there's diamonds in every rough, quality-wise there's light years between your average TV-logo '71 Fender and your average s-serial '79 (for example). The earlier TV-logo basses have rocketed in recent years, although there's still bargains to be had.[/quote] Yeah, there's a general perception that Fender quality gradually got worse ever since CBS took over, and is bourn out buy subtle changes to the contouring and neck pocket routs (on teles at least) that made production cheaper. So might be expected that on average 71's might be better than 79's. But conversely, an 83 is also more likely to be a decent instrument than a 73. Certainly eighties Fenders seem to be considerably lighter than most seventies ones.

Yeah that's a 3000 that Mani's playing - it's got a notch in the pickguard just below the neck. The guy from the Arctics is playing a 3001, where the pickguard follows the line in one smooth curve.

It's not the perceived value of the instruments I'm questioning so much as the logic behind it. '75 Fenders seem to go for more than '77's, for instance. Yet as far as I'm aware the only differences were the serial used and finish options. So there seems to be a logic that dictates that the earlier the bass the better it is - I mean, surely people can't be buying these instruments purely for investment? Although 80's Fenders will surely climb in value, I wondering whether people are eventually going to twig that, on average, they were in fact higher quality than 70's ones.

Like it says - where's the logic in the pricing of older Fenders? 70's models can go for a lot of money nowadays, yet they're universally recognised as probably the lowest point in Fender production. Three bolt necks on Jazzes, ridiculously heavy bodies and some really terrible quality control abounded throughout the decade. Yet people are prepared to shell out based apparently purely on the age of the instrument. Pre 'S' serial models seem to go for more than an equivalent 'S' series model, even though there may be only months between the two models and as far as I know the only difference was the actual serial. When Bill Schultz took over in '81, he started addressing the quality problems Fender had been having. Yet these instruments are a snip compared to, say, a '79. There have been other landmarks in Fenders history, like the introduction of the Corona factory, and a complete rejigging and expansion of the factory in '98, but people seem to ignore the things that affect the actual production of the instruments in favour of an older date. Anyone else think that, on the whole, 70's Fenders are over priced? And do you think the bottom will ever fall out of the market?

A quick google reveals that Chris Wolstenholme still uses a Marshall B150 when he can get away with it, so one of those is an option. He also uses Pedulla basses, so maybe a Jazz bass (Squier?) might be in order. It's not a short scale, but you get a very different sound with short scale basses anyway, due to the lower string tension.

Mani used to play a paint spattered thing, which as far as I remember was a 4005. The bass he's got in that picture is a 3000, identifiable by the notch in the pickguard below the strings.

It's a Ricky 3001 - only produced for 10 years or so as a budget model. I think Mani used a 4005.

For Jam nights check out [url="http://www.electricbluesclub.co.uk/blues_jams.html"]http://www.electricbluesclub.co.uk/blues_jams.html[/url] Not sure how up to date it is, so a call to the venue might be in order, but there are links to other listings as well.

Sticking guitars in the wrong category is something I've seen more obvious scammers do - it makes bidders think 'wow, the guy's screwed up and the bidding's low because no-one else has seen it'. Of course people do make mistakes, but the guy has also got a Gretsch sitting in the Accessories>Strings section. Maybe he's kosher, but to my mind the wrong category + private auction + 3 day listing = cash on pick up only.

I've had a lot of trouble finding simple male to male connectors as well. You'd think that you could pick them up all over the place, but I've only ever found daisy chain types. I've considered OBBM before but, though undoubtedly quality, they do work out quite expensive.

£800 isn't really much of a bargain, considering it's age and condition. Another Rick auction for a '73 just ended with a final price of £795 - better condition as well. [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rickenbacker-4001-Bass-Guitar-1973_W0QQitemZ190115339668QQihZ009QQcategoryZ4713QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rickenbacker-4001-Ba...1QQcmdZViewItem[/url]

+1 Where else is BargyBass going to post about Roberts strings?

Chipboard? No idea what they're made of nowadays, but I've seen enough battered old ones to know that they were definitely ply. Maybe just the rear baffle is chipboard, which is a practice that Marshall uses.

I think Chris is right that high value instruments that are out of reach of many young bass players will always reach a premium after 20 odd years, but also I think it's almost impossible to second what the market will be doing in 20 years time, as so much of it is down to high profile players. Looking back, Beck's association with Danelectro, Johnny Ramone's with Mosrite, and Kobain's with Musicmasters have all pushed up the price of what were cheap instruments. It's nothing to do with quality per se, just peoples' perception of that quality (and of course fashion). So if a high profile player started using, say a Gibson Victory, we could expect the price to rocket. So yeah, Aria Pros and Westones might shoot up in value, but only if they gets that celebrity endorsement. Having said that, I'm amazed at how comparatively cheap vintage Ricks are - high profile classic basses that are in vogue with many bands at the moment. Their fashionable status only seems to have benefitted the Jap copies at the moment.