Bassfinger

I may be missing something here, but to the prospective purchaser 8% of not very much, say a £220 Squier, is a lot less than 8% of a helluva lot, such as a $2000 MIA Fender.

I think the main difference that justifies the price is about 15 dollars an hour to the workers that make them. The top end Squiers are well in the average Fender ballpark, and the cheap Squiers are deliberately made for a different market. But the slightly all-knowing comment about the Fender bass being used by top flight musicians seems to delibetarely overlook the fact that the likes of Jeff Healey, George Harrison, Mike Dirnt, Jack White, and a host of others have all used Squier guitars or basses live or in the studio. How it sounds, feels and plays is what matters, and if the one with the cheap components meets a players needs then who is anyone else to suggest that they should not do so because it is cheaper, and I ask as both a Squier and Fender owner myself? Im sure he never meant to, but he did come across a little bit patronising in his summing up at the end.

I seem to have this recollection that Steve Coogan plays bass, but having formed the thought in my mind can find little about it on the interweb. Does anyone have any more info?

While the question was doubtless meant to be flippant, it backfires somewhat as the answer is very serious - with an oscilloscope or signal analyser, yes, in essence you can hear with your eyes and incredibly accurately, consistently and effectively at that. Indeed, you can see things you would have no chance of detecting with your ears. As for the validity of the experiment itself: What were the torque settings on the truss rods of these supposedly otherwise identical instruments? What weight of glue was used to secure the fretboards of each? How old was each instrument, as ageing and drying of woods and finishing materials can make a big difference? Where was each instrument stored prior to the test, at what temperature and humidity and for how long? And 101 other questions about technical and construction consistency and repeatable results with a statistically significant number of difference samples And independent is the experimenter?⅕⅕1 Answers on a postcard to... We don't know house, Too many variables street, No scientific consistencyville, Waste of timeshire. The entire comparison is massively flawed, and if people think that represents evidence of the tonewood effect they're very mistaken. Tonewood may or may not make a difference (I have my own views on that) but the demonstration is completely useless as a valid comparison, and no meanful conclusion can this be drawn from it. The instruments may appear superficially identical in all but material, but I guatantee you there will be measurable differences in construction and set up that will have profound effects on the tone. This is why we go to music shops and try 3 or 4 "identical" basses, all made from the same wood, and hear a different tone from each.

The neck on my 50s is beautiful. Opita the only bass neck ive owned that didnt need even a slight fret dress.

Im looking forward to Carol Kirkwood playing with her maracas for charity.

Im enjoying this at the moment. Very cleverly written.

To be fair its more convincing than most relic jobs.

The original expereiment is so riddled with errors of scientific methodology, that the only conclusion it is safe to draw from the whole exercise is that Sadowsky did not pass GCSE general science.

Absolutomundo. You can spend 5 times as much with ease, and not get anywhere close to twice the bass.

Harley Benton.

Jackson's story is only his interpretation of events, much like Let It Be was in its own day. Im not knocking it - I'm actually looking forward to watching it - but this is just another outsiders own personal take on events of which only a tiny part were filmed. Discussions, arguments, moaning, sniping, all happened for years in private and behind closed doors, and all the masses of available film footage only captured a fraction of that. Im sure it will be interesting and absorbing but I don't buy into the this is how it really happened bullpois. There are only 4 or possibly 5 people that know for sure how it went down, and 2 of those are beyond telling their tales in this plane of existence.

Some people pay good money for those kind of jollies.

Our band very recently had exactly this conversation with the landlady at our home gig. She reckoned that for every £250 she paid out on a band she would want to see an extra £1000 minimum going over the bar. The last gig we did for her the bar actually ran out of glasses at one point, and she was delighted with that. She owns the pub and I have no clue what her client status is with the breweries. We charge £250 to the pubs that book us regularly, £350 to others. Between £500 to a grand for weddings etc, but its rare we do them, and actually turned one down recently because we didn't want to do 2 gigs in a week (were all elderly and need an early night now and again.)

Saw a "relic'd" Squier 50's CV precision for sale recently for £1150. It was rather overdone, as they say. Now, the new one is a superb instrument and worth every penny of the £330 or so asking price, but flushing it down the loo and storing it for a year in a chicken coop did nothing in my mind to justify almost quadrupling that price.

Ah, much like me. I too am often found with an erection at a live gig.

Christ, 5000 Euros. I paid a quarter of that for my '69, although mine had suffered the indignity of a new neck at some point. Even so...

Ooooh, that is pleasant indeed. The CV's are, on average, extremely well finished, and the very best of them are as well constructed as anything with a Fender badge from any factory. Indeed, it kind of makes a mockery of Fenders own pricing when a subsidiary is making instruments this good. Thats a lot of quality instrument for very sensible money. I can feel my wallet twitching... I must agree with the quality of the CV fretwork. My 50s CV has a wonderful fret set up, perfectly finished ends, incredibly even, the first bass ever that ive not needed to do even a very minor fret dress job on. Indeed, it kicks my US made precision in the vegetables and steals its lunch money!

McCartney's coming out, you say?

I might get a T shirt made up. "Toucha my bass, I puncha your face!" I habe no sense of humour when it comes to the wellbeing of my beloved basses, but I could chuckle at that.

A high mass wrap will give a more vintage tone.

Theres nothing in regulations that requires an officer to be confirmed in rank prior to specialising, and while not especially widespread it is becoming more common. (Source, Mrs Bassfinger, ex Major crime T/DCI, who still has a brother and a sister in the job). Its not so unusual now to see bobbies with a particular aptitude moving into other roles, CID in particular, well before being confirmed. Thanks the the Cabbage of Policing its now not possible to scratch your arriss and pass wind without being a qualified D, and this is causing a serious shortage of candidates in roles such as collision investigation, etc. Several forces are now taking officers straight into CID, although this didn't start well with the pilot when every single one of the Met's officers on the first intake, all 43 of them, failed the phyisical on the first day... I did briefly consider it when I left the Army, but I decided to buckle down and belatedly sort my eduction out instead.

I bet that makes for some entertaining arguments with yourself.

Just don't ask him for gardening advice 🤫

Is that perhaps more a function of better design, better materials and more accurate construction, rather than any inherent chracteristic of simply having more mass?