warwickhunt

[quote name='jakesbass' post='195875' date='May 10 2008, 10:32 AM']+1 and have a bump for a lovely instrument. (I do think Warwickhunt was trying to be helpful though)[/quote] I was honest!

[quote name='Davetbass' post='195764' date='May 9 2008, 11:38 PM']Is there any reason WHY someone would stick a JD truss rod cover on a thumb? [b]Does it make it more sought after[/b]? Just a thought:) EDIT.....A wee bit pissed![/quote] In short, YES. The JD Thumbs were the earliest versions and they differ in a variety of ways, 'some' of those differences make the JD model more desirable to 'some' people. TBH as with many manufacturers, the earlier the better and the JD model was the earliest of the Thumb basses. In fact the earliest recorded models were originally designed to be headless and had a tiny body and a very short top horn! However any bass, inc' this one (as I have stressed all along) should be judged on its own merits; desirability and value lies with the bass itself. My 'beef' (for want of a better word) is with historical accuracy ... A wee bit pissed... but still compos mentus

[quote name='ednaplate' post='195077' date='May 8 2008, 10:39 PM']I'm certainly no expert in Warwicks but reading the reply from Warwick my understanding would be; Pre 87 = JD Bass 88-92 = JD Thumb bass Post 92 = Thumb bass Therefore a 91 would be a JD Thumb as stated although if I'm wrong I've no problem being corrected. No idea about the bridge issue however. Good luck with the sale and now let's all have a group hug.[/quote] Nope! I'm sorry for being so emphatic about this but regardless of how you wish to interpret that 'cut and paste' email from Warwick, the Thumb bass ceased to be referred to or marketed as a JD Thumb bass after 88. At this point it was marketed/sold/advertised call it what you will, as the 'Thumb' bass. A bass produced and sold in 1991 would not and could not have had that truss rod cover! This shouldn't/doesn't affect any value that this seller wishes to place on the bass nor should it detract from any interested party but I can assure you, that cover did not start out life on that bass. I've owned a bunch of these Thumb basses from the JD model (which coincidentally has a whole bunch of differences, see here for a JD bass [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=14788&hl=jd+thumb"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=...amp;hl=jd+thumb[/url] ), through to a couple of 90/91 basses and I 'know' what I am talking about. The seller can advertise this bass how the heck he likes and I have no issue with the quality of the instrument etc. but I am going to be a pain in the backside about the definition of JD Thumb as it is quite specific and does not refer to a 91 Thumb bass

[quote name='Gunsfreddy2003' post='195018' date='May 8 2008, 09:35 PM']Agree to disagree. If you want to buy then contact me![/quote] Hmmm thanks but no thanks on both counts

[quote name='Gunsfreddy2003' post='194965' date='May 8 2008, 08:27 PM']Suggest you re-read the response from Warwick it clearly states that the name Thumb bass was adopted in 1993 and before that it was JD Thumb Bass (87 - 93) and before that just the JD bass. Do not really care what the Warwick forum says - the manufacturer will know best and I have just repeated what they have told me! Anyway if anyone wants to buy this beautiful bass then please contact me.[/quote] You have a PM I concur that anyone wishing to buy a beautiful bass should contact you... but

[quote name='Gunsfreddy2003' post='194949' date='May 8 2008, 08:00 PM']I beg to differ - please see the e-mail message below that I received from Warwick only yesterday. Dear Mr. Brown, in the early days the Bass was called JD Bass, after we changed it in 87 or 88 in JD Thumb Bass and in 92 or 93 we just called the Bass Thumb Bass. best regards Warwick Markneukirchen / Germany H.P.Wilfer 07.05.2008, 20:12 Visit our www.warwick-distribution.de[/quote] Of course you can beg to differ However your email from Warwick supports what I just said. It was changed in 87/88 to just the Thumb bass. I can assure you that if you ask on the Warwick forum about the dates for the Warwick range you will get a response that backs up what I have said. TBH I've not actually ever seen a JD model with the 2 piece bridge... I have a feeling that the JD model invariably had the 1 piece Schaller bridge! There are former owners of JD Thumb basses on BassChat that can confirm that these basses had the JD name dropped in or about 88. Either way you have for sale a Warwick Thumb bass from 91 (if your date is correct) and I wish you every success in your sale

Just for the interest of historical accuracy. The Thumb bass was only referred to as the Thumb JD bass (named so after the guy who helped design it 'John Davis') for a year or two; 86ish. If your bass is a 91 model then I'm afraid someone has replaced the truss rod cover, as I can assure you that a 91 bass would not have that JD cover on!

[quote name='EBS_freak' post='189279' date='Apr 30 2008, 09:55 PM']Not being funny dude, but with feedback like that, I'd be scared shitless buying something like that off ebay.[/quote] Unless of course you knew the person selling the amp was a trusted fellow BCer I was pretty much spot on with my estimation of the value... well I must have been as I won it

[quote name='Brother Jones' post='192230' date='May 5 2008, 01:59 PM']Lovely. Hope this is still available. Would you consider swaps or P/exs? Ta.[/quote] [quote name='eubassix' post='193075' date='May 6 2008, 04:57 PM']Thanks for the + comments Machines & Golchen - this is currently well-ahead in terms of Watchers on ebay @ 20+ .... so am hopefully confident it will sell by the end of the week. Brother Jones: sorry, but under the circumstances cannot offer swaps or p/ex's (as it would merely mean another bass to get rid of...)[/quote] Of course if I was offered a certain Zon...

PMd re prices