Warwicks Vs Spectors

[thisnameistaken]

I've owned a couple of Warwicks but only played Spectors, never bought one. I like both. I would say Warwicks have their own kind of sound where Spectors are perhaps more versatile / generic. I think Warwicks look nicer which has surely swayed me towards them but I also just love the sound of my old Thumb and I've never come across another bass that sounds like it.

[Gust0o]

[quote name='Chris2112' timestamp='1318324934' post='1400443']

This 'D' profile might be great for you, or anyone else who prefers a big fat neck. If you've never tried one, go and find the nearest metal lamp-post. Grab the post just above the base where it thins out. Now go for a 'fretting' motion with your hand, imagining you were fretting the strings of a neck. The 'hand wrapped around a lamp-post' should give you a fairly accurate idea of what a Warwick 'D' profile is like. I recall on Talkbass, a lot of people didn't like Warwick because of 'the clubby neck'. Clearly, they were referring to the new necks as the old 'C' shape was nothing like clubby! In total, it's one of the worst necks I've ever played on a production bass, and I am a big Warwick fan!
[/quote]

I can't lie, this sounds absolutely horrible!

To which models did this neck apply? Is it a limited run? I suspect I'm going to have to really try - as a few others have pointed out - to find out.

[sambucadan]

Which model/age of Warwick have you been offered in trade?

[molan]

I've also owned both and, when comparing the 'higher end' models, much prefer Spectors.

As others have said the main real comparison model from Warwick is the Streamer and I find the newer ones a little 'antiseptic' sounding.

I've owned a couple of Spector 5 strings and love the narrower string spacing - really worked for me as a bit of a 5 string newbie as I found the neck width on 19mm spaced bridges a bit too much to handle.

I had one particular 5'er that wasn't the most exciting bass when played at home practice levels but it really came to life when gigging, maybe the best sounding bass (from my player's position) I've ever played live.

Conversely I had another that sounded lovely at home but was simply too heavy, for me anyway, to gig with

In general terms I think a lot of US Spectors sound very similar (because most of them have the same body woods). Not a huge tonal variation but, if you like that tone, then they sound great!

My favourite Spectors have all been US models. I found the Euros to be good but just didn't feel as nice to play as the US ones. Obviously there's a big premium on the US basses which isn't really repaid in direct correlation to quality but I could afford the US ones so didn't really care too much about how much they were.

I had an '86 Streamer for a while which sounded nice but had one of those open grained wenge necks which I never got on with. Traded it for a Kubicki with a pencil thin neck which I much preferred.

As far as Warwicks are concerned I definitely think this is a brand that you really need to 'try before you buy' as I've gound different ones to sound & feel quite different.

[Chris2112]

[quote name='Gust0o' timestamp='1318330987' post='1400593']

I can't lie, this sounds absolutely horrible!

To which models did this neck apply? Is it a limited run? I suspect I'm going to have to really try - as a few others have pointed out - to find out.
[/quote]

[font=lucida sans unicode,lucida grande,sans-serif]You'll find this neck most commonly on Warwick Bolt On basses from after around the year 2000. Any bolt on Warwick with an ovangkol neck (bolt on Thumb, Corvette, Streamer LX etc etc) I would be tempted to give a wide berth. The Thumb and the Corvette seemed worst affected in my view. Prior to this, the bolt on necks were made from wenge and were a slim, rounded 'C' shape. The D shape is a real club, and not just because it's so deep and fat in your hand, but because the edges of the fretboard are flat and sharp with it being a 'D' shape, which shows up any subtle flaw in the fretwork.[/font]

[font=lucida sans unicode,lucida grande,sans-serif]Now, I have to say, I am not usually one to complain about neck profiles. and I often find it strange when people say they are getting rid of a bass because they don't get on with the neck. I don't think neck profiles are as important as some people make out (like some people who give luthiers specs for milimetre perfect neck builds on a custom bass, but the Warwick baseball bat necks are so bad I wouldn't want to own a bass with one attached. I had a thumb with the old profile neck and it was a joy. [/font]

[Doctor J]

I quite like the D shape on my LX, took a while to get used to but it does have a certain charm once you get to know it.

[dmccombe7]

[quote name='sambucadan' timestamp='1318317247' post='1400312']
Just to set the record completly straight ;-)

The Streamer models are similar to [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spector"]Stuart Spector[/url] NS basses in terms of body shape, original one piece bridge (now a two piece) and headstock design, which caused a legal conflict when the Streamer was first introduced. Spector eventually sued Warwick for copying the body shape, but the jury decided not to fine Warwick[sup][[i][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed"]citation needed[/url][/i]][/sup]
It was well documented that the first versions of the Streamer were exact copies of the NS-Bass™. The SPECTOR® NS-Bass™ was designed by Ned Steinberger for Stuart Spector in 1977; 5-years before Warwick was formed.
At the annual NAMM Show in 1985 Stuart Spector became aware that a new German-based company was producing exact copies of his now famous SPECTOR® NS-Bass™. Spector, along with Ned Steinberger, confronted Hans Wilfer and he agreed to pay a licensing fee to both SPECTOR® Guitars and Ned Steinberger in return for being able to continue to produce the Streamer without legal action.[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streamer_Bass#cite_note-1"][2][/url][/sup]
Shortly after this agreement was reached, SPECTOR® sold to Kramer Guitars. The new owners had no interest in pursuing Warwick to enforce the licensing agreement and Warwick continued to make the Streamer without any consequence. It is also noted from several sources that Warwick never paid any of the agreed fees.
In 1990 Kramer became insolvent and filed for bankruptcy. In the wake of their financial failure Stuart Spector formed Stuart Spector Design, LTD. in 1993. In 1997 after a lengthy court battle, Stuart Spector bought back the trademark and copyrights to SPECTOR® and threatened to sue Warwick to enforce the 1985 license agreement.[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streamer_Bass#cite_note-2"][3][/url][/sup]
Facing new legal action from SPECTOR®, Warwick changed many design elements of the Streamer body to make it less like the NS-Bass™. The pending litgation was eventually dropped because the new Streamer design was no longer an exact copy of the NS-Bass™
[/quote]

Whow ! and you've obviously never really taken any interest in this subject then
I didn't know about any of this and I've owned a Warwick Thumb NT (EMG's) since 1989.
Thanks for that cause i did wonder about the similarities back in the late 80's/90's.

I have to admit that my Warwick probably has the easiest neck to play of any bass I've ever owned or tried incl Spector basses.
At this stage though I have to say I keep going for my Jazz for some odd reason.

Dave

[dc2009]

[quote name='Doctor J' timestamp='1318355582' post='1401100']
I quite like the D shape on my LX, took a while to get used to but it does have a certain charm once you get to know it.
[/quote]

I like that mine is a flattened D, far more comfortable for your hand than a sticky-outy C IMO.

[Linus27]

Am I right in thinking that newer Warwicks don't have such a chunky neck these days? My 2006 Streamer Jazzman which is a bolt on does have a chunky neck but my old 2010 Corvette which is also bolt on has a very nice thin neck. I am sure I read somewhere that Warwick's went back to slimmer necks over the last few years.

[Gust0o]

[quote name='sambucadan' timestamp='1318335095' post='1400677']
Which model/age of Warwick have you been offered in trade?
[/quote]

It was a $$ Custom, which Evil has subsequently managed to do a good deal on... just not to me. Not that I think the thread is wasted, as it's brought out some really good points - and a lot of information for people to consider.

I had no idea about things like the Kramer Spectors - and still have no idea how they sit in the panoply of Spector basses! And the tip about the neck is intriguing. No local shops stock to try, so that'll be one to look at again.

[LiamPodmore]

Only played both briefly, so i can't really comment on the playability much, but they both have a damn good sound, Spector only marginally beating Warwick in that area, but most (85%) of Warwick basses that i've seen are just ugly on a new level, whereas Spector have that gorgeous holoflash finish, as mentioned above, and just generally look better in my eyes.

Liam

[mart]

[quote name='Linus27' timestamp='1318512508' post='1403134']
Am I right in thinking that newer Warwicks don't have such a chunky neck these days? My 2006 Streamer Jazzman which is a bolt on does have a chunky neck but my old 2010 Corvette which is also bolt on has a very nice thin neck. I am sure I read somewhere that Warwick's went back to slimmer necks over the last few years.
[/quote]
Yes, their default neck from 2010 onwards is a much thinner profile, with nicely rounded fingerboard edges. You can still request the chunky neck, but the default is thin.

[Linus27]

[quote name='mart' timestamp='1318515315' post='1403177']
Yes, their default neck from 2010 onwards is a much thinner profile, with nicely rounded fingerboard edges. You can still request the chunky neck, but the default is thin.
[/quote]

Excellent, thank you for confirming.

[ern500evo]

Well if any bolt on Warwick built after the year 2000 has a neck like a club then my Spector must be a whole tree trunk because the neck on my '09 Streamer LX is definitely thinner than my NS!

[Mog]

I really think the neck shape/profile issue is irrelevent. Surely if you switch between 4,5 & 6 string basses then neck width shouldnt be an issue. Just adjust the position of the bass to get a comfortable one.
Tone wise Spectors are more versitile. Looks wise premium Warwicks are the winner. Depends on what you're after really. Both have fallen into an association with metal bands which is unfortunate because they really are not a one trick poney.

Personally (and this is saying a lot from a Warwick freak) I'd say if you want a bass that will cover everything and look good, without breaking the bank then Spector wins hands down.

[Chris2112]

[quote name='Linus27' timestamp='1318512508' post='1403134']
Am I right in thinking that newer Warwicks don't have such a chunky neck these days?
[/quote]

Correct, and they're better for it now. But the prices of new Warwicks is just outrageous! I always wonder who the hell buys them new!

[Gust0o]

[quote name='Chris2112' timestamp='1318528334' post='1403429']

Correct, and they're better for it now. But the prices of new Warwicks is just outrageous! I always wonder who the hell buys them new!
[/quote]

I remember thinking this when I first started playing - a young teenager, venturing into the music shops for the first time. I remember joining some friends in Manchester for a look round a few places, and venturing into one which had all these Warwicks on the wall.

I couldn't believe the prices back then. Considering how long it had taken me to save the £200-or-so I had in my pocket for a new bass, I couldn't believe people would be paying £1000s of pounds. They were brilliant, but completely unobtainable - and I think still have some of that aura, even though I am now hitting 30 and wouldn't blink at the price.

[Bassmonkey]

Loving that avatar buddy. Good to see other Mighty Whites fan bassists are out there! Lets hope we do a number on Donny tonight. Sadly, I'm playing so will miss it!

[VTypeV4]

I wouldn't swap my Streamer LX5 for a Spector or anything else for that matter..

[Gust0o]

[quote name='Bassmonkey' timestamp='1318587553' post='1403971']
Loving that avatar buddy. Good to see other Mighty Whites fan bassists are out there! Lets hope we do a number on Donny tonight. Sadly, I'm playing so will miss it!
[/quote]

Oh yes! MOT

[Chris2112]

[quote name='Gust0o' timestamp='1318586053' post='1403953']

I remember thinking this when I first started playing - a young teenager, venturing into the music shops for the first time. I remember joining some friends in Manchester for a look round a few places, and venturing into one which had all these Warwicks on the wall.

I couldn't believe the prices back then. Considering how long it had taken me to save the £200-or-so I had in my pocket for a new bass, I couldn't believe people would be paying £1000s of pounds. They were brilliant, but completely unobtainable - and I think still have some of that aura, even though I am now hitting 30 and wouldn't blink at the price.
[/quote]

What I mean is, I remember looking at some new Thumbs that cost £1800, and that was a 4 string BO. They probably cost more now! That sort of money could get you some serious handmade-in-the-UK custom bass enjoyment, even buying new.

[dmccombe7]

I was 29 when i got my Warwick Thumb (still have it) back in 1989 and it retailed at circa £1200. Managed to haggle down to less than £1000.
Wouldn't part with no matter what the offer was.
Back then your WAL, Status & Fender USA's were similar prices so its not as if they were grossly over the odds in comparison IMO.

Big difference then was there simply wasn't the same choice available as now. Bass scene is simply heaving with great playable basses and price isn't always a guarantee for best quality so always try before you buy.

Dave

[TorVic]

Another difference that matters during maintenance is that most Spectors have a gloss finish (though some also have natural oil finish). Most Warwicks on the other hand have oil finished bodies that require waxing and maintenance.

[alanbass1]

Like others I purchased when prices were on a par with similar quality basses. I bought my Thumb NT new in 2001 for £1,600 when visiting the bass centre in Wapping looking for a high quality bass. There were several in the store, along with many other basses and this particular one stood out (for me) and it has been my main gigging bass since. They are expensive now and I haven't seen a new Thumb NT in a store for years so I have no idea whether they are any different now to when I bought mine. Lot's of people are saying 'you can get a hand built bass from a british luthier for less than a new Warwick' - I agree, but my only experience with going this route was severe dissappointment. Even when trying my Thumb in the store, the one I purchased felt and sounded better (IMHO) than the two others they had in the store........you might have a massive choice of options getting a custom built bass, but you are stuck with paying for it whether it meets your expectations or not.

[GarethFlatlands]

Ignoring everything else, with the prices Warwicks are going for at the moment you'd be nuts not to consider one.