vintage_ben

I've been told the pre 2000s Warwick sound different although I've not tried a new one to compare, maybe it's related to the amount of hairspray being used by factory staff? Take an 70's to ad 80s to a 90s Stingray (all 2 band eq). At a glance visually identical but construction-wise and on the inside completely different. You can barely get them to sound the same. I suppose it's by which one you set your 'standard'. Again, its all purely subjective.

Not really, my point was I think it's a very difficult task to for a multinational corporation reproduce an [b]identical[/b] guitar to one that was produced 40 years ago using 40 year old tools and techniques, this doesn't imply new instruments are substandard. An example of an exceptional instrument or my personal disappointment in the particular range does not relegate all other instruments as substandard either.

It's a reasonable point, I'm not saying that a bespoke instrument made to this spec couldn't sound or play the same, but off the shelf modern equivalents are often made with different materials and by different methods so it's not surprising they sound different, not worse for the most part, just different. Also I'm not sure about the maturing thing, it's really noticeable with an acoustic guitar, and I accept pickups do change a little over time but I think with a solid body maturing is more a feel thing than a sound issue, I may be wrong. For example a pre Ernie Ball Stingray has alnico pole pieces in the pickups, they are now stainless steel, quite a different sound. Just on a purely mechanical level, the factory of the 60s (and certainly the 50s) is not the factory of 2009, a highly automated factory, certainly the case with Fender and Gibson. The way guitars were being made by Fender and Gibson (more-so prior to the 60s) would have been closer to those of a top class luthier, handmade by craftsmen. The available wood stock would have been very different (have ever picked up a late 70s Fender Bass!). There are of course now strong legal points with regards to spraying nitrocellulose and an embargo on Brazilian Rosewood. These all impact on the end product. I was fortunate enough to play a 'new' 63 Strat (i.e it had barely been take out of the case from new), the playability and sound was exceptional and far exceeding most modern Strats I have seen. Having said all that I have seen some really exceptional too custom made reissues with very reasonable price tags, probably 99% there which will do the job no problem. With a price tag of less than £2k vs. £40k+ for an original.. of course I'd go for the new one. But I still maintain that if you want the real deal, you've got to buy real. Still disappointed with new custom shop Fender's though. I tried a Nash weeks back, really really good and was very impressed with a Lakland Duck Dunn I tried a few weeks ago also. Hence the sale of my Warwick in the sales thread.. plug plug [url="http://www.nashguitars.com/timewarp/timewarp_basses.html"]http://www.nashguitars.com/timewarp/timewarp_basses.html[/url]

Dare I raise my head on this subject again...... Couldn't agree more with the playing philosophy, I play my '67 Jazz as my main instrument at have a mint '77 stingray that also comes out for gigs short enough to sustain the weight and works great in the studio. The thing that often get forgotten by British players is that the electric guitar is significant part of US cultural history and somewhat of a sacred cow. In a market that is basically driven by American customers the 'museum' factor cannot really be escaped. How many people buy Wurlitzers or old Cadilacs and use them as their main hifi or commuter vehicle, not many I'd guess. These are "show pieces" and it's only fair that some guitars are afforded the same prestige given their impact on the world of popular music. Love them or hate them, most of us wouldn't be bass players if it weren't for Leo's legacy. [quote]On the whole, vintage axes play and sound no better than modern equivalentst[/quote] I'm afraid I'd have to disagree with this is a statement of fact. It's a purely subjective matter and I know players who wouldn't touch a modern bass with a barge pole for good reason. I looked for a number of years to find a Jazz bass that sounded the way I wanted it, I tried every one I could lay my hands on, old and new and settled on my '67. To [b]my ears[/b] I've never heard a better 'Jazz' sound. Clearly technology has moved on over the years and some modern basses allow for some spectacular playing, with actions so low you barely have to touch the strings. Personally I'm not a fan of a low action, but again this only my opinion, who am I to impose my view of what constitutes 'good' playability? I think the truth of the matter that many vintage axes do outperform their modern counterparts (Relic '64 Jazz bass v.s original I'd offer up). A modern active Sadowsky super jazz or other more 'exotic' bass will no doubt outperform a vintage bass in many areas, but I find can fall somewhat short in other respects (in fact a have been scowled at for turning up to a studio with an active bass on more than one occasion) for example if you want an authentic Jamerson sound I think you can't do better than a 60s P-Bass, or indeed a good US reissue will probably outperform most 'super basses' when getting that sound, but is going to be pretty poor if you want to emulate a Mark King or Marcus Miller 'hi-fi sound' (I'm not drawing a comparison between these two as players!). No doubt a Ferrari is technically superior to a VW beetle, but I'd feel much cooler ridding down to Cornwall for a weekends surfing in the later. It's horses for courses really.

Interesting comments, clearly many have issues with the shop and there seem to be a mix of constructive and unconstructive ones. Giving the weight to the later, I'm removing my post for risk of further inflaming the situation. To the protagonists I'd say this. With regards the stack knob. Yes instruments are played when required by staff, as well as played by potential customers. I take offence at the accusation of 'playing around'. You'll also be aware this bass no longer belongs to the aforesaid owner. I'm sorry this comment wasn't taken as the humorous response to an above post it was meant to be. The '77 P-bass was a great playing and sounding bass despite the issues it had. The guy who bought it was extremely happy with it. This bass would not be an investment and was not sold as so. I have never knowingly sold a bass as non-original, but clearly mistakes can happen. Some instruments sell better in certain shops than others hence the price discrepancy. We have a very hard time selling fretless basses perhaps? 73' 4001s are checkerboard bound, 74s aren't? But I can't speak for my colleagues or the London shop. The intention of my post was to offer my own personal perspective on this topic. I neither represent the views of my colleagues, nor the business. Of course I am fully aware that some people will continue to consider V and R as 'overpriced', 'selling dodgy stuff' and nothing I say will change that. We all have bad customer service from time to time, as a sales person I do my very best to stop this from happening. As I said, I've no doubt met some of you before; hopefully I'll meet you again... but not playing any of our high-end guitars.