Hellzero

Won't come back here anymore, I have way better ways to waste my time. Trust whoever you want: I don't give a shīt anymore. Get screwed by unscrupulous sellers who pretend to know everything : It's your own money after all. Farewell forever, I'm really fed up by human beings!

So, if it's all about money and nothing else while completely refuting written historical evidences and the fact that with Fender's anything can be swapped to create a totally authentic original fake, that's enough for me. My grand grandmother used to say: "Help a villain, he'll shit in your hand!" She was right. Farewell!

I'VE OWNED LOADS OF VINTAGE INSTRUMENTS AND HAVE ALWAYS TAKEN THEM APART, FURTHERMORE AS STATED EARLIER I RAN MY OWN LUTHIERY AND REPAIR SHOP OVER CLOSE TO 2 DECADES AND HAD LOADS OF VINTAGE INSTRUMENTS TO FIX OR SIMPLY SET UP, AND I ALSO WROTE A MÉMOIRE ABOUT VINTAGE INSTRUMENTS THAT HAS BEEN PUT HERE SEVERAL TIMES. Maybe you should stop replying without having really read and understood what was written.

Maybe you should learn to read...

I'm also compiling a list of very useful books, trying to be the most exhaustive, to help those interested in authentication of vintage Fender's. But, of course, there will still be people denying the written evidences.

So according to the catalogues, the 3 knobs Jazz Bass was only available from 1962 on. Of course, the instruments have been photographed earlier, so Leo Fender own statement saying that the 3 knobs version was introduced in late 1961 early 1962 is absolutely right. Late meaning the last quarter of the year, anything before that can't be fully original and authentic: this is called recouping information. As I wrote earlier some people are rewriting history for their own purposes.

Here is the labelled 1962-63 official Fender catalogue where you also see the 3 knobs version of the Jazz Bass.

And a 1962, according to the guy speaking, Fender catalogue where you see the 3 knobs Jazz Bass (go to 2:30): I know the guy is turning the pages like a moron.

It's Indonesian mahogany. It's simply stated in the specifications. 😉

I will give you a list if books later guys and also take a look at that link. I also wanted to say that there's a difference between introduced and built, and not only semantically speaking: that can explain some rare examples, but not a norm...

Thanks for that, but I don't think he wrote a book about his instruments...

First, maybe you should have watched my selling ads of vintage Fender's that I always take apart for authenticity checking, just like any other instruments, that said. Second, I had my own luthiery and repair shop over close to 2 decades. Third, I wrote a mémoire in French about vintage instruments that I put here a lot of times. I think I'm as eligible as they are, no? In regards to Klaus Blasquiz who wrote The Fender Bass, he is the only Fender historian to have met and interviewed Leo Fender for his book as he wanted to have the most accurate information, but, again some people prefer to rewrite history to serve their purposes. And being challenged is the best way to improve knowledge, but there's too much bullshìting about vintage instruments.

@GuyR and @bakerster135 : Why don't you question the expertise of Bass Gallery or Andy Baxter and not only mine? To my knowledge, they have no proof of their expertise, except making a lot of money reselling instruments that are simply sold on commission and 15% of 18k is £250 more than the average monthly English salary. The "funny" thing about Fender vintage instruments is that those experts always highlight the fact that Leo Fender was a cheapskate using everything he had on hand to build instruments. So according to this, people like Klaus Blasquiz who is the only Fender historian to have met Leo Fender becomes questionable and not reliable, which is totally delirious. Some people are simply rewriting history the way that suits them and everyone is just ignoring the real history, because they have been really convincing... Maybe it's time to think about that. Expertise of a Fender instrument is really like archeology and you have to recoup a lot of details. If you want some recommendations for book about the subject, I can give you a list, but you'll have to read them and dismantle loads of Fender instruments, which is what I've done over 40 years (and always for free).

And suddenly everybody will be looking at you and not at the singer anymore, a real win-win situation...

Found another trick working very well:

Nothing, they bin them.

Not only the 80's, it started earlier to give a new shine at a lower cost to some not vintage at all instruments back then. A lot of Fender's have been slaughtered during the 70's and 80's before the vintage hype. An overspray is something you can do yourself with a simple can of spray finish clear coat, you just have to be careful with the type of lacquer used.

Both of the proposals are correct, but due to higher prices of vintage gear, the second one would certainly be the most appropriate.

Hi Chris, hope you're well. What's been done here, as it's obvious that the colour is too vivid, is that the clear coat (responsible for the yellowing) has been removed and an overspray (not a new clear coat as it wouldn't have that orange peel vibe) has been applied making it look like new, but with all the scars left!?!

@bakerster135 , the 3 knobs arrangement was decided, as introduced is not really correct, in late 1961 early 1962, according to Leo Fender himself, but was fitted to 1962 Jazz Basses on. As you said, you may find oddities, but these appear more after the sale to CBS in January 1965 as they were emptying drawers. In the case of the advertised bass, the only period correct pot is a Stackpole from early June 1961, the two others being a Japanese model for the neck pickup volume and an unknown date CTS for the bridge. Furthermore, the new solders on the neck pickup clearly indicate a modification or more precisely an alteration. When Fender switched to the 3 knobs arrangement, they also switched to CTS pots... So, on the model we are looking at, the control plate doesn't match with the rest. It's no big deal per se, but should have been mentioned.

I had a few Alembic's over the years including some Series One, which were all neck diving, and other models too, but the koa top Spoiler I owned was really amazing on all aspects, too bad it was a 32 inches scale or I would still own it. They were all on the heavy side, which is also a negative point for my broken back. But these are extraordinary instruments built the same way. Congratulations Mark for importing them in the U.K. 👍👌

By the way, the 3 knobs arrangement was introduced in 1962, but, as usual, not on all Jazz Basses. And the placement of the logo was the way it was done in 1962.

Been away yesterday, so sorry for the late reply @Burns-bass. The body is period correct, some details confirming everything including an extra hole at a certain place and the black painted neck pocket, which was the norm back then for sunburst, but it has been oversprayed. The pickguard has absolutely not shrunken and is not glossy on the back, so is not from that era, but a later one. The controls must be concentric in 1961 and furthermore only the tone control is period correct being a Stackpole from 1961, but it doesn't belong to this bass, so the whole control plate has been changed certainly due to the Jaco syndrome. Solders on the neck pickup are brand new. The neck has also received an overspray and the logo is not original as it should be darker and positioned a bit closer to the nut. Not a fake at all, but there are some non correct elements and an overspray, worth asking for a lower price.