I've got the Warwick bug.

[warwickhunt]

[quote name='GarethFlatlands' post='1194547' date='Apr 10 2011, 01:18 PM']I've heard similar things from another guy who owned a Streamer Stage 1. Must be a duff model generally...[/quote]
A sweeping generalisation!

I find the Streamer Stage I to be a fabulous bass and having owned a pair of SSII (among a multitude of other NT Warwick) I'd still personally take a SSI.

[BassBod]

I had a similar experience. Owned a SSI and liked it (but not really enough to keep..too modern sounding for most of my work) and later got a SSI fiver. Really didn't get on with it - always sounded a bit feeble, and felt oversized. Moved it on after a few weeks.

The SSII seems to be my Warwick..lovely woods, great design, but probably still too modern sounding for me!

[thumbo]

I own a Thumb Bolt-On and Stage 1 (both 4 strings). They are very different beasts, which is exactly what I like about them. For me the Thumb gets a lot of studio time because I like the natural midrange it produces and the general Warwick character of it tonally. Whereas the Streamer gets to go to band practices and gigs because it's lighter, more comfortable to play (because the 1st fret isn't a mile away!) and tonally I feel like it sits in the mix of a live situation a little better, but then that's very subjective to the style of music being played.

My advice would be to try them out, get your hands on old warwicks and new warwicks and I think you'll realise fairly quickly which one is best for your needs. Trying out older models might be a bit trickier, but the difference between the old and new is pretty big.

Edited April 10, 2011 by thumbo

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='GarethFlatlands' post='1194541' date='Apr 10 2011, 01:12 PM']The guy nearly fell off his chair when I told him I paid £400 for it. Stu only paid £600 for his '94 Thumb.[/quote]

I paid £670 for my '91 Thumb. A couple of years back I watched the same guy I bought it from on eBay replace it with another '91 Thumb that he ended up paying £1050 for. Still worth every penny if you like that sort of thing but it made me appreciate how cheap I got mine.


[quote name='warwickhunt' post='1194554' date='Apr 10 2011, 01:23 PM']I find the Streamer Stage I to be a fabulous bass and having owned a pair of SSII (among a multitude of other NT Warwick) I'd still personally take a SSI.[/quote]

I also prefer the Stage I. The SSII to me seems a bit over-thought, to the point of becoming a very genericised bass. The SSI has more character.

[Chris2112]

I paid £590 for my Thumb BO a couple of years back. Given that it was a 1999 model with a wenge neck and looked brand new I thought that was alright!

[wrinkleygit]

just dug out the old '93 thumb b/o put on a set of d'ad chromes & I'm back in love, I think the older models balance better on a strap because the bottom strap button is off centre by the way

[Lfalex v1.1]

[quote name='Chris2112' post='1194747' date='Apr 10 2011, 04:37 PM']I paid £590 for my Thumb BO a couple of years back. Given that it was a 1999 model with a wenge neck and looked brand new I thought that was alright![/quote]
I paid £515 for a '97 Fortress MM5 recently. That was alright, too. It's a stonking bass and a bit of a 'Ray killer (IMO)

[bigthumb]

[quote name='molan' post='1192462' date='Apr 8 2011, 12:33 AM'][/quote]

Damn GAS!

Anyhow the Thumb and Streamer are great basses. Both very different but both very usable and I'm pretty hard pushed to decide what one to use when gigging, I love them both.

[Chris2112]

I'm definitely more of a Thumb man than a Streamer man. Mainly because I always preferred Spector basses over the Streamers. Okay, so they're very different instruments, but you can only play one at a time (unless you're Michael Manring).