Belka

Can't say for sure but given the prices you see on Reverb they would probably at least hold their value - from that point of view they're a better bet than Ritter, Alembic, Smith, Fodera and MTD.

Nice idea but not true. 90 days in 180 is the rule for the whole Schengen area. If you tried to do that you would be deported. The only places you could try that are by going from a non-Schengen EU country to a Schengen one; Ireland, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia and Cyprus may allow entry even if you have just spent 90 days in the Schengen area. Apparently this loophole may not last long as these countries are looking to join the Schengen area. People in the UK (not singling you out - and certainly not looking to criticise as it's not surprising - British passports have generally given lots of visa free options) generally don't have much of an idea of visas, work permits and residency. I think for a lot of people the idea of getting a visa is as easy as turning up in Turkey or Thailand and getting your visa on the spot. Lots of people also think the 90 day visa run - popping over the border then popping back, as you sort of suggested above, is an option. It's generally always been illegal, but a lot of poorer countries would turn a blind eye as they liked the idea of westerners bringing hard currency into the country. Believe me, it will not work in a lot of places any more, and to try to actually get residency in countries such as the USA, Canada, Australia, and now the EU, is a complex, drawn out, expensive process with no guarantee of success at the end.

Basically the ETIAS will not provide any more flexibility/freedom for Brits visiting the EU.

I don't think anyone was saying that UK musicians would be barred from Europe, but that it would harder and in some cases not financially viable for tours to take place. Also, no mention of the carnet/VAT issue which is separate to visas/work permits entirely. The ETIAS is not a replacement for a Schengen visa. It's the EU's version of the current US ESTA - basically a visa waiver for tourist travel of 90 days and under. The ETIAS will only operate for countries which currently have 90 day visa free travel to the EU, countries like USA, Australia, Canada, NZ, Ukraine, and now UK. Countries which currently need a Schengen visa to visit the EU (China, Russia, pretty much all of Africa and Asia) will still need to apply for a Schengen visa. Any UK national who wants to work, study or live for longer than 90 days in an EU country will still need to apply for a visa (I may be wrong but I don't think this would be a Schengen visa - if you applied to work or live in France for example, you would get a French visa/work permit which would only allow you to work in France, not any of the other Schengen countries).

I'm sure that the visa would be available to Brits, but they have to be applied for, which would probably require the venues to issue invitation letters, and the applicants to show proof of savings. Also, they may only be issued for a certain country, which wouldn't help with multi-country tours (I may be wrong about this). Plus, I don't think this would solve the carnet issue. In the end, the hassle and cost of getting a visa will probably make lots of tours unviable; visas are available to tour the States and Canada but you don't see many smaller bands going over there.

Good points - light swamp ash is more likely to sound like alder whereas heavier northern ash has a brighter harsher tone. I agree with some of what BigRedX says - predicting sound based on body wood selection is nowhere near an exact science and it is just one part of the puzzle. In my opinion neck materials, and pickup type and location have a greater influence on sound. Then you also have nut, fret and bridge type/materials to consider. However, if the pickups/electronics have sufficient clarity, I'm sure that body material will make a difference, although it's debatable whether this is more to do with density/weight than the actual species. I n some cases I'm sure it makes little to no difference; a short scale mudbucker-equipped EB0 could have a brass nut, badass bridge, heavy ash body and ebony fretboard and would still sound like mud.

For some people none at all. Others may prefer the way one or the other looks. There will also be a slight difference with regard to sound. Of course, this is only one variable and there are a whole host of others, but you don't have to be so dismissive of it.

If it's Japanese, it's probably their local type of ash, which is called 'Sen' apparently. Pretty sure it's not alder.

Yes - I wanted to say this too. Marcus may have a Sadowsky preamp in his bass now (if he still actually uses it now he's the Sire guy) but for most of his career the preamp in question was the Bartolini TCT. This was a forerunner to the NTMB and is simpler but will get the tone. Having said that I also think options like the East or the Pope Flexcore would be great - both are very transparent, have excellent options for flexibility/customization, and importantly have a passive tone which the Bartolini doesn't. Pickup wise I'd say the Aguilar or Seymour Duncan 5 string jazz pickups (it is a five string, right?) with '70s winds would be the ones to go for. Stay clear of anything overwound (I think a lot of Fralins fall into this category) or humcancelling.

Keep it as it is. Also, if you do it in green, then technically, from a vintage point of view, the tort guard will be incorrect. It was only sunburst, shell pink and olympic white that came with tort pickguards back then, so although I'm sure it would look good it in green, it wouldn't look like it did when it left the factory.

Yes, I saw it was a '62 so the unpainted headstock would be normal for that year. Flea's shell pink Jazz is an authentic custom colour and also doesn't have the matching headstock.

And there was see-through blonde, although I'm not sure if that was considered a standard or custom colour. They seem to be pretty rare on 1960s basses but they were the standard for Telecasters for a long time.

I used to think so too, but after being corrected by Fender experts it seems that actually the vast majority, if not all, of the custom colours Jazzes came with matching headstocks as standard, at least from 1963 until around 1969. The only exception is see-through blonde. So any time you see a 1963-1969 Jazz bass in a custom colour with an unpainted headstock, you can assume it to be a refinish. Again, I'm not that much of a vintage expert so happy to be corrected.

i know what you mean; you used to see them for not much money at all back in the '90s when I started playing. I would add a couple of caveats though. Firstly, I don't think they were ever as bad as some say they were. Some exhibited poor routing/assembly but the vast majority didn't. Also, there is nothing inherently wrong with the three bolt neck construction or bullet truss rods, and yes, they were heavy, but a lot of things were back then. I would also say that '70s Jazz basses, and to a lesser extent the Precisions, have a very different sound to the '60s ones. If you want to get the Marcus Miller tone you have to forget about anything made prior to 1972, which could also be a factor in their increasing value. Of course, I'm sure that nostalgia and the fact they are now old are also reasons why they're going up in price, but the same would be true for the pre-CBS instruments as well.

I may be wrong but I think that Fender produced a relatively large amount of basses in 1966, which probably accounts for the large sample size of those you see. There are practically no 1967 and relatively fewer 1968 Fenders around; 1969 is when you start seeing larger numbers of instruments with the TV logos showing up, so I'd guess a lot of 1966 serial numbered stock was probably assembled/sold in the subsequent two years. I think the same thing happened in 1978. You hardly see any basses with '79, '80, '81 or '82 serial numbers, but there are loads of 'S8' basses around, with later neck pocket stamps/pot codes etc.

To be fair I did say 'in my opinion', although yours as a fellow user of the amp is just as valid. I still maintain that it sounded bland and nasal to me, but my 'bland and nasal' could be your 'clear and punchy'. You did actually say that you used the graphic EQ with some minor adjustments, so that wouldn't be the flat tone either. The tone with the graphic EQ engaged, even if the sliders were set flat, was still beefier than the tone with nothing engaged. I wasn't the biggest fan of the presets myself; I would use the graphic EQ more for tonal adjustment, although I do think the presets could sound good if used in the right applications. Also, although the first preset was the classic Trace Elliot mid cut, the second one actually provided a low mid boost. I neither loved it nor hated it to be honest. I'm certainly glad I had it back then; there wasn't the choice you get now and it certainly served me well. However, I'm not going to let nostalgia for my lost youth make me think it's somehow the holy grail of amplification (not saying that about you, but I do think this phenomenon exists). If you love the Trace tone and nothing else will do, it may be for you, and that's great, but I would never consider that they are at all superior to modern amps. Amplification has come on a lot in the last 30 years and there is so much choice out there now. I still stand by my comment regarding price; it's a supply and demand thing - if the value of these goes up, which it might, then by all means pay what you think it's worth, but at present, if someone has a budget of more than £100, they would be better off going for a model with more power, or a separate head/speaker stack.

I gigged one of these for years. It served me well for those years. I could say the following pluses and minuses with regard to it: Pros Very well made, pretty much indestructible and never let me down on a gig. Loud considering its wattage (although it says 130, it would be what modern manufacturers consider to be 260/300 watts). It was basically fine for small-medium pub gigs - but struggled at larger venues, although this isn't really a criticism as the 250/400/500 model would cover those. Versatile EQ section with lots of tone shaping options - you should be able to make any bass cut through the mix. These days they're really cheap. Cons Really heavy by modern standards. I could lift it by myself but it was pretty uncomfortable. It's a very coloured amp. If you love the sound of the Trace Elliot presets, then you'll love the the tone. If you want something transparent, this will not be for you. I guess connected to the last point is the issue that the flat tone of the amp without any presets/graphic EQ is really quite poor in my opinion. Thin, nasal, and bland would be words that spring to mind. It's almost like they designed it that way - to make you go 'wow, that's cool' when you engage the presets/graphic. If you can get it for a decent price (don't pay more than £100), then go for it - it's worth a try for sure.

Does yer missus let yer back in 'ouse when yer get 'ome or does she mek yer sleep in the ff...ff..fff'in shed?

You're both mistaken. Meddle is the best, although unlike any of their later work it doesn't have the concepts running through it. I think the Wall and Animals are ok overall and brilliant in places, but when Rick Wright checked out they were missing a key musical ingredient. Just my opinion of course.

Demis Roussos - not a lot of people know he played bass. Or that he was in a progressive rock band (Aprodite's Child) before becoming a '70s suburban housewife staple.

I remember reading copies of Bass guitar back in the '90s. You would see used Wals in the classifieds for under £1000 all the time. Yes, they became unobtainable new around the time the whole Tool thing took off; back in the '90s they were just basses rooted firmly in the 1980s, and were no more sought after than Jaydees and so prices were similar. I used to see them at pub gigs all the time back then. However, those electronics are unique and if you want that sound I feel too that nothing else will do. Also, with a waiting list like they have, they have no choice but to ask high prices. If they came down to even around the £3000 mark they would be inundated with orders and would either have to outsource production or see the waiting time for a build stretch even further into the future. Also, if you do spend money on a Wal, new or used and don't like it, you won't lose any money if you sell it on (although who knows what COVID might do to the market). @CamdenRob , your bass looks great; sure it sounds great too.

No idea. I'd guess it's probably real but has been refinished by an owner or perhaps the Japanese shop.The body doesn't look cheap to me, it doesn't have the neck heel carve but not all of them did. I just don't think the finish is particularly attractive. I don't think it's a carbon fibre neck either, just carbon effect lacquer as you say. I honestly don't think anyone would fake an NYC. Contrary to what some people believe, the vast majority of Fodera copies are poorly executed Chinese jobs that no-one would ever confuse with the real thing. If someone had access to Fodera pickups/hardware and the luthiery skills and wanted to fake a bass they'd probably do a custom, not an NYC, as they could charge a lot more money for it. So, it's almost certainly the real thing, with an unconventional refinish. The pickups with the Fodera butterfly on them are Lane Poors.

Couple of pictures to show what I mean. Here's one with the dual coils, and an early looking 4 string with the Schaller roller bridge and what look like Lane Poor pickups. There are probably quite a few exceptions to the standard and custom specs.