warwickhunt Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 (edited) I know it says Parker on the case and headstock (in correct font etc) but the design just doesn't look like something Parker would have produced and it does seem a bit odd that he states that it isn't even in the Parker catalogue or website. Could he be phishing for a greedy collector? The headstock rear is pure Wal and parts of the body look Godin by design... I just can't get my head around the fact it is the same guy who has produced the 'Fly'; an instrument that looks so right as a 6 string guitar but soooooo wrong as a bass [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rare-Parker-PAB40-Acoustic-Bass-Free-shipping-in-USA_W0QQitemZ250210398244QQihZ015QQcategoryZ4713QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rare-Parker-PAB40-Ac...1QQcmdZViewItem[/url] Thoughts on this one? Edited February 3, 2008 by warwickhunt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwickhunt Posted February 3, 2008 Author Share Posted February 3, 2008 It always pays to Google first! It appears this was just previewed at NAMM... still say it doesn't look like something he would produce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-77 Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 yeh Google is your friend, [url="http://www.wwbw.com/Parker-PAB40-Electric-Acoustic-Bass-Guitar-i757170.music"]http://www.wwbw.com/Parker-PAB40-Electric-...r-i757170.music[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ped Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 Quite like the look of that but the headstock is a real cop out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 Personally I think the headstock goes better with the design of the instrument than the standard Parker Fly one. At least they haven't simply imposed the generic company designed headstock whatever the rest of the design of the instrument unlike another manufacturer I can think of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ped Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 It wouldn't look right with the 'Fly' headstock certainly - but I really don't like small tapered headstocks like that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Burpster Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 As much as normal Parker designs are too far off the wall for my delicate tastes.... That one floats my boat.....! :brow: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 Liking that very much. Yum. It's as nice as the Fly bass is awful, which is very. Shame, because the Fly guitar is simply brilliant... if I was a gtrist, I'd have bought one years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 Agree about the Parker bass. One of the best necks I've ever played but definitely the most uncomfortable body shape ever. It's as though they never built any prototypes, simply scaled up the guitar and went straight into production... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tauzero Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 [quote name='Rich' post='133095' date='Feb 3 2008, 04:03 PM']Shame, because the Fly guitar is simply brilliant... if I was a gtrist, I'd have bought one years ago.[/quote] I was seriously underwhelmed by the Parker Fly g**tar when I had a play on it, although that was because I didn't like the neck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.