Warwick Fretless

[Kev]

[quote name='Grangur' timestamp='1421182761' post='2658251']
This confuses me, my basses are 2008 and 2005 Both have 38.9mm nuts and the neck depth front to back is 20mm approx.

You sound so very informed and accurate, but mine don't comply. I also don't recall re-carving them with a Stanley knife and if someone else did, they did a real pro job.

My basses are:

J147007-08 - Fretless
H117225-05 - Fretted
K110687-04 - Corvette

All the necks are the same and the fretted Streamer is a neck-through, so I doubt that's been changed. (before you suggest the necks aren't original)

Please explain. I'm looking forward to learning from a real Warwick expert like yourself.
[/quote]

Forget the nut width and the depth of the neck, this is about the shape of the neck. The U profile was common in the naughties instruments, but there were still inconsistencies. The Limited Edition models, for example, seem to be carved quite slimly, certainly the Dirty Blond thumb I owned felt very different from a Streamer LX I owned from the same year.

I must say though, I did not think the neck profile on the standard instruments changed much at all 2000-2009? One thing I would see, the U shape I have found more pronounced/obvious on the five string models.

Edited January 13, 2015 by Kev

[Grangur]

I would agree the profile is more D shaped than you would find on a Fender. This is understandable when you hear that the cover over the TR on a Fender is surprisingly thin, where Warwick is a quality bass rather than being a cheap mass production model.

I have, by comparison, played a Warick from 2000 (ish) down at my local store. I think it may have been a Fortress, and the neck was much fatter compared to any other Warwick I've played.

The advice really is go play before you part with good cash. A bit like most basses really.