Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

FOR SALE 1991 Warwick Thumb Bass

Gunsfreddy2003

By Gunsfreddy2003,
in Basses For Sale

 Share

Recommended Posts

Gunsfreddy2003 Experienced

Gunsfreddy2003

Posted
Posted

I am selling my pride & joy Warwick Thumb bass which I have owned for just over 15 years and was only owned by one person before me from new. This has been my main bass for many years so does show some signs of wear & tear in places but nothing that detracts from it's beauty or great sound.

This is the early edition of this bass which was first called the JD Thumb Bass before being renamed just Thumb Bass in 1993.

Spec is as follows:

- Wenge Neck
- Wenge Fingerboard
- Bubinga Pommele Body
- MEC Active Pickups
- 2 Band EQ
- Black Hardware

Comes with a gig bag and Warwick polish!

Looking for around £1,300 for this beauty but she does have to go!

If you need more info or pics then PM me and I will do the honours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
warwickhunt Grand Master

warwickhunt

Posted
Posted

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!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gunsfreddy2003 Experienced

Gunsfreddy2003

Posted
  • Author
Posted

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 name='warwickhunt' post='194939' date='May 8 2008, 07:49 PM']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]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
warwickhunt Grand Master

warwickhunt

Posted
Posted

[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 :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gunsfreddy2003 Experienced

Gunsfreddy2003

Posted
  • Author
Posted

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 name='warwickhunt' post='194960' date='May 8 2008, 08:15 PM']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 :huh:[/quote]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kev Grand Master

Kev

Posted
Posted

i think what warwickhunt is tryin to say is that this is essentially not a jd bass, its just a thumb released before the official name change. i think he's right with JD basses not having the 2 piece bridge as well, i havn't seen one anyways...

buttttttt im no warwick expert by any means, so feel free to ignore me!

gorgoeus bass anywho

Link to comment
Share on other sites
warwickhunt Grand Master

warwickhunt

Posted
Posted

[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 :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gunsfreddy2003 Experienced

Gunsfreddy2003

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Agree to disagree.

If you want to buy then contact me!

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='194977' date='May 8 2008, 08:41 PM']You have a PM :)

I concur that anyone wishing to buy a beautiful bass should contact you... but :huh:[/quote]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ednaplate Explorer

ednaplate

Posted
Posted

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
warwickhunt Grand Master

warwickhunt

Posted
Posted

[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 :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G-77 Explorer

G-77

Posted
Posted

My Thumb is 1990 and marked as a "Thumb Bass" on the truss rod cover. Regarding the bass for sale by the OP, it should have the same slimmer neck profile as mine and not suffer from neck dive as the more recent Thumbs have. As i have said a few time here and BW if you want a thumb you should get one from this around this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gunsfreddy2003 Experienced

Gunsfreddy2003

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That is exactly how I read and understand the e-mail from Warwick!

Regardless of JD Thumb or just Thumb it was definitely built in 1991 and is a lovely bass to play and has served me very well over the years.

I paid £1,800 for it in 1993 when I bought it from the Bass Centre in old premises at Wapping.

I have just ordered a new bass and do need to sell this one. I have been advised that my price expectation is a little high (I am only going with the value suggested to me by my local bass expert!)

So if anyone interested then please contact me and we can talk money!

[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]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tauzero Grand Master

tauzero

Posted
Posted

[quote name='Gunsfreddy2003' post='195230' date='May 9 2008, 09:27 AM']I have just ordered a new bass and do need to sell this one. I have been advised that my price expectation is a little high (I am only going with the value suggested to me by my local bass expert!)[/quote]
Sadly they don't seem to be getting much - the JD that warwickhunt pointed to wasn't selling at £800. Fortunately, I have no intention of ever selling mine, so I'm not bothered about the value.

What I didn't realise was that all Thumbs from 87ish were JD Thumbs. I thought it was a Thumb variant with a slimmer neck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoirBass Mentor

NoirBass

Posted
Posted

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='195092' date='May 8 2008, 11:03 PM']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]

I maybe should not get involved here but I have to concur with Mr Warwickhunt - I own an '89 "Thumb Bass" that I bought new in 1990 (So I know its stock). The truss rod cover says "Thumb Bass" So the JD issue appears to be only before '88. I have also never seen one (a JD) with a two piece bridge. The cut and paste from Warwick is in very broken english and from what I can understand backs up what I'm saying along with the evidence above.

We are not trying to attack you in any way (quite the reverse) - there are some very knowledgeable people here at the forum and anomalies like this just make us want to get our facts straight.

Anyway, point is if yours is anywhere near as good as mine it'll be a fantastic bass!

Best of luck with the sale

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tonyf Proficient

tonyf

Posted
Posted

[quote name='finnbass' post='195591' date='May 9 2008, 05:41 PM']Neither is my '88 :)[/quote]
+1

Owned a 90 4 string and a 91 5 string fretless (wow, mwaaaaahhhhh a go-go).

Neither had JD on the truss rod cover or any reference to JD. Thumbs throughout.

T

Link to comment
Share on other sites
warwickhunt Grand Master

warwickhunt

Posted
Posted

[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 :huh:

... A wee bit pissed... but still compos mentus :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gunsfreddy2003 Experienced

Gunsfreddy2003

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Here, here!

That's all I want to do for crying out loud!

I am new to the forum and have enjoyed it up until this episode even met a fellow BC'er at a gig that I played at last weekend!

I know that there are some really knowledegable people on the forum and I respect the fact that a lot of you guys know a heck of a lot more than I about many things to do with the bass but I have only used the information given to me by Warwick. If that is wrong then it is not my mistake - I am not trying to con anyone or be underhand. The bass has not been altered or changed in anyway at all by myself for the last 15 years!

If it is not a JD then so be it but that truss rod cover has always been there and I had no reason to think any different.

So if we could stop with this it is or it is isn't then that would be cool.

We can all agree that it is a 1991 for sure and I am sure all agree that this was the better era for Warwick when they were a sought after bass manufacturer used by many pro's and a million miles away from the mass market manufacturer that they have become today. I know when I bought this bass that the thought of buying a new Warwick for under £500 was just a fantasy!

I do appreciate the feedback from everyone on this topic - I am glad that it stimulated some interest!

Now going outside to enjoy the weather and relax - no work makes me happy!

[quote name='OutToPlayJazz' post='195777' date='May 10 2008, 12:09 AM']For gawd's sake, just let the poor guy sell his bass. I'm sure it'll sell on it's own merits!!![/quote]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jakenewmanbass Proficient

jakenewmanbass

Posted
Posted (edited)

[quote name='OutToPlayJazz' post='195777' date='May 10 2008, 12:09 AM']For gawd's sake, just let the poor guy sell his bass. I'm sure it'll sell on it's own merits!!![/quote]
+1 and have a bump for a lovely instrument.

(I do think Warwickhunt was trying to be helpful though)

Edited by jakesbass
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...