Misdee

Just to muddy the waters further, AJ is on record as saying that his signature Fodera is essentially a big Fender Precision Bass. the instrument he made his name with in the mid-70s. Fodera basses are not really my cup of tea, but there is no question that they are worth the money they cost. The fact that they are manufactured in NYC may contribute to a small extent to their price tag, but it is not realistic to suppose that they would be half the price , or even anything remotely like that if they were made anywhere else in the USA. The reason they are expensive is because of the amount of skilled man-hours it takes to make these basses.

For me, the big question is whether Yamaha is going to revive Ampeg as a prestige brand manufactured primarily in the USA.I certainly hope so. I bought an Ampeg SCR preamp a while back and, contrary to the marketing hype, it was an extremely disappointing product, as far as I was concerned. I'm sure that Yamaha will improve the standard of Ampeg gear, I just hope they make quality their priority rather than affordability. I don't want cheap gear with an Ampeg logo on it, I want proper Ampeg even if it costs a lot of money.

I've played both of these basses and I don't think you can say that one could replace the other. Sadowsky basses have a distinct tone, largely due to the preamp. Sei basses, particularly the more modern style exotic wood Jazz basses have a modern hifi tone with less of the classic Fender sound in it. Sei basses are superbly built, but the attraction of Sadowsky basses is not just owing to the quality of their construction. It is the overall appeal of their design and the profile the company enjoys.That is why the bass world is full of companies that make basses that they and their customers tell themselves will substitute for a Sadowsky.

I don't want to hijack this thread, but are the Stingray Classic necks on the chunky side? I've never got to play one of these basses, but I really want a Stingray and I much prefer the old-style 2 band EQ and vintage styling. I'd always presumed that the Classic necks would be fairly slim, like the old Stingrays. Any info gratefully received.

I am not an expert on copyright by any means, but surely this "Wrongo" is on very shaky ground? Anyhow, I am genuinely mystified why so many people think the Bongo is ugly or ungainly in some way. I think it is a beautiful design. It looks better in the flesh than in pics or photos. I agree totally with Dr. T.that the recipient of this bass should try to get his hands on a real Bongo. If you want a high - tech, hifi modern bass with a powerful sound and a distinct personality of its own then you can't do better.

I'm not an expert on this subject by any means(!), but I would be amazed if a chip on a black finish like that couldn't be masked to some extent without going to the lengths of a total refinish. A skilled repairer would probably be able to do something to make it far less noticeable.

I would think that the chaps at The Gallery might well be able to sort out a little chip in the finish like that. Even if it can't be made perfect, I'm sure it could be improved a great deal. Regarding why Wunjo haven't re-finished the knock before selling the bass, it could be for a number of reasons. Some people wouldn't be particularly bothered by superficial cosmetic damage if the bass is suitably reduced in price. Also, the shop could be accused of trying to mask the damage if they did not openly draw customers attention to it. Much better for the shop to leave the bass as it is and let people decide if they want to buy it and then do something about the damage themselves.

Came across this band by accident on YT recently. Have to be honest with you, I find it a bit mystifying why young people would want to ape the sound of Led Zeppelin's first album fifty years after the event. This band is the musical equivalent of those historical re- enactors who play at being in the olden days.It would be easy to be scathing of these kids, but I'm sure their hearts are in the right place. Personally, I blame the parents. As with most nostalgia, this music is hankering after a golden age that in reality wasn't that golden. The great irony is that these youngsters are looking backwards at a time when "progressive" music was all about looking forwards, being experimental and original and creating new forms.

I would have to make the distinction between Yamaha BBs and a Fender -style PJ. The Yamahas, particularly the bolt-on ones, may at face value share certain construction characteristics with a Fender, but in practice it is a very, very different animal. A Fender - style PJ has its own idiosyncrasies and shortcomings, but can still be very enjoyable and useful. How even do you need the output of the pups to be? I've got a USA Lakland 44-64 with a jazz neck and Lakland PJ pickups and it is a snarling beast of a bass. I cannot think of many musical situations where it wouldn't do an admirable job. A simple but very versatile and practical instrument.

I've got a few PJ basses, and have owned a fair number over the years. They have their pluses and minuses, but in my opinion the pluses outweigh the minuses! The biggest issue with this configuration, particularly on a conventional Fender - style bass, is the inherent seeming difference in volume between P and J pickups. There are various reasons for this discrepancy, and some pickup sets address this problem more effectively than others. There is also an issue with phase cancellation when both pickups are on together. These are part of the characteristics of a PJ, and not necessarily a bad thing, but it is definitely a thing. A notable exception to the rule would be my Yamaha BB PJs. I've no idea how, but these basses suffer none of these problems associated with more traditional PJs. For me, adding a J pickup makes a traditional P much more versatile and articulate. It just makes it a much more useful bass, and I have never noticed any significant detriment to the sound of the P pickup.

I forgot to say in my earlier post that Bean9seventy, I really like your bass playing in the YT videos. And like a lot of other folks, I'm enjoying the music posted on this thread. It really was a golden era for this style of music. It seem like in the age of computers some of the soul has been lost. Unfortunately, my memories of nightclubs and discos during this time was that they always ended with a big fight at the end of the night. Worse still, where I grew up we didn't even have a late night kebab shop until the mid-1980's.

I was about in those days and remember only too well what things were really like.The mid - to - late 1970's in Britain is not a time I am particularly nostalgic about, for all kinds of reasons. School disco dancing exhibitions would be one of those reasons. I also remember the BritFunk movement all too well. Sorry to say it, but much of that music was a second-rate imitation of it's more sophisticated American inspiration. Listening back now, most has not aged well. A very notable exception would be the Average White Band. They were one ( perhaps the only one ) of the very few British bands who were playing funk/soul music in such an authentic and convincing manner that they enjoyed great success in the USA. They were also notable in that they attracted a multi-racial audience in America - a phenomenon far less common in the 70's than now. American listeners thought AWB's music sounded just as good as it's US equivalent. Also, it is my recollection that people were well aware of the jazz funk and soul music that was coming out of the USA during that era. It certainly wasn't like today where you can go on Youtube and get slapping lessons from Victor Wooten, but records featuring bass techniques like slapping were everywhere. When I had my first bass lessons in a provincial town in the North of England about 40 years ago, the chap giving me tuition knew all about slapping and his technique was perfectly legitimate and correct. It might not have been the information age we live in now, but players still had enough ingenuity and know-how to work out how to play new techniques. In fact, I would venture that musicians were actually better at working out things by ear precisely because they weren't being spoonfed as they are today.

To be fair, this bass actually looks better than the legitimate AVRI 74 sunburst. It's a nicer 'burst and the tort plate makes it look like an early 70's model. It will not have any negative effect on the resale value. I've got one of these basses and they are smashing instruments. The chunky neck feels good and is surprisingly easy to play, probably due to the very narrow nut width. The 74 pickups sound suitably nasty too. Hope you get a lot of enjoyment from your lovely new bass.

Flats on a Stingray, you can't really go wrong. It's such a classic sound. It was a revelation to me when I realised that Bernard Edwards was using flats back in the early days. I had just presumed he had a really good muting technique! So I was expecting great things from the bridge humbucker on the 25th Anniversary. Unfortunately, the bottom end on that bass is so massive that it is a bit too much for my taste with flats, even ones as articulate as the Thomastiks. I've no doubt that the Thomastiks on a Stingray Classic are indeed a match made in heaven. Flats on a Bongo is an interesting proposition. That might work!

Like many others before me on this thread, I would recommend thinking long and hard before parting with your Wal. I long for a Wal every time I hear Alan Spenner playing Roxy Music. Takes me right back to those days! If you fancy trying something a bit different from what you already have, what about a used Yamaha BB2024 or 2024X? I have seen them for sale at very reasonable prices on Basschat, and in my opinion they are instruments of the highest order ( I own both). They are similar to a Wal in so much as they have a very strong and consistent midrange tone, although both basses have a distinctly unique sound all of their own.If weight is a priority, the 2024 is significantly lighter than the X version.

I know it's not a Stingray, but I tried a set of Thomastiks on a 25th Anniversary with a humbucker in the Stingray position and they were mainly a bit of a disaster. The sound was so thick, for want of a better term, that I felt that I couldn't hear myself properly. I love those strings on a Fender, so it was quite a surprise and disappointment when they bombed on the Musicman. I suppose it just shows you how you can never really tell until you try it.

I would say What is Hip? is not a simple or easy bassline in most people's estimation. Like just about everything that Rocco plays, to make it accurate and convincing (and to keep it properly in time!) is a lot harder than he makes it look. There are so many basslines that are much harder to execute properly than you might think on first hearing. A classic example would be Gimme Some Lovin' by the Spencer Davies Group. The slides under the chorus have to be bang on or it will never sound tight. I've heard so many bands cover this song and make a pig's ear of it by being complacent about it's simplicity.

To echo what others have already said, there really can be no right or wrong when it comes to nut widths, just personal preference. And that preference can be as much a result of an individual's physique as any technical or musical considerations. I can't play a 1.75in traditional P Bass width very well because i've got little hands. Another consideration is that different nut widths/neck profiles make you play differently. When I pick up my Fender Precision with a1.625 nut width it puts me in a different frame of mind from when I play my USA Lakland 44-64 P with a very slim Jazz profile neck and skinny nut width. A wide nut tends to make people play a P Bass in a more traditional manner, if you follow my drift (and yes,I know that is a sweeping generalisation and you can find plenty of exceptions to that rule).

That does indeed look like the original finish. If everything else is kosher then you have definitely got a bargain, considering what prices 70's Fenders are trading at nowadays. I'm sure I speak for other Basschatters of senior years when I say that I cannot believe the price P Basses from this era are now commanding. Thirty years ago they were hard to sell for £200. I know because I was trying to sell a couple! Things change and the world has moved on,I suppose. Anyhow, looks like a lovely bass at a very fair price and I hope you get a lot of pleasure and a lot of fun playing it.

Just out of interest, does anybody know which shops charge which rate of commission for selling bass gear? I would expect there are some that charge more than 15%. I would be very surprised if anywhere charges less, but I'd be interested to know.

I think 15% is entirely reasonable commission for a shop to charge. As the saying goes, a fair exchange is no robbery. Both parties are getting something out of the deal that is worthwhile. The shop doesn't have to tie up capital in stock, and the punter gets a marketplace in which to present his bass to the buying public. You can't necessarily blame the shop if the goods don't sell. There can be a number of reasons for that; most usually because the item is overpriced and/or no one wants it at any price.

From the photo, its difficult to tell if the bass has it's original finish, or if it has been stripped and refinished as natural. If it has been refinished then that will approximately halve the value of the instrument as a vintage piece. How fair a price you paid depends entirely on how original the bass is and it's overall structural condition. To be honest with you, it is impossible to tell that just looking at the photo. I'm not trying to sound negative at all - if you enjoy playing this bass then great - but accurately assessing vintage Fenders is a bit of a "detective" job at the best of times.

The BB2025 is indeed a beast! I would prefer 19mm spacing, but then again maybe it wouldn't have such a great neck profile so I should be careful what I wish for. Regarding the BBNE2, I've never played one, probably because I am a recent reluctant convert to the world of 5 strings ( I am, very sorry to say, old enough to remember the world of bass before such fripperies were even thought of). Also, in the past few years I have been gravitating much more towards passive basses, albeit ones with supercharged hot pickups. I am sure the NE2s are great basses, just not my cup of tea. All that might change if I played one, though.

I concur with those who say that the Steinberger XL was not lightweight. It's a long time since I played one, but I distinctly remember being surprised how substantial they felt, probably a similar weight to a typical P Bass. The Streamline, in comparison, is very light, maybe about 7 1/2 lbs. In terms of whether the Status improves on the XL design, I have to say it is probably better in some respects, but not as good in others. The Steinberger, to my ears at least, had a very distinctive tone. I would describe it as being quite dry,and even a bit hard in the midrange. That was part of its appeal. The Streamline sounds like graphite but is a bit warmer. Also, the Status obviates the need for the "balance flipper" and leg rest, although whether the Streamline is ultimately as comfortable to use as the Steinberger is a matter of opinion. To be honest with you, it really is so long since I played a Steinberger I can't give an accurate evaluation. What I can remember with total clarity. is what fantastic instruments those original Steinbergers were, how great they sounded and how much I wanted one! I think a big part of why these basses are not currently in production is because they were so difficult to manufacture. Even if Ned could buy the patent back perhaps he doesn't want the hassle.