Warwick basses - when did they up their game?

[Al Krow]

Seen a Streamer Stage 1 up for sale on another forum which turns out to be a 2006 model. Looks gorgeous and I'm very tempted but...

At the back of my mind I've got a nagging feeling that Warwick went through a rough patch in terms of quality around 1996(??) to 2011(??), but then sorted themselves out, introduced the GPS and Masterbuilt ranges and the prices of their new basses rocketed from £800 to £2,500+ from 2012 to 2014.

Is any of that correct?

What were typically the concerns / issues with the pre-2011 basses?

Edited August 15, 2018 by Al Krow

[jonno1981]

I’m no expert but I can think of a few things from my own experience. 

They had some hardware problems including a terrible nut design that kept snapping off, these are easily replaced with the latest one though. Their hardware seems to tarnish really fast compared to other brands as well. 

For a while they changed the neck profile to a proper baseball bat, this got reverted back to a thinner style a few years later. 

Ive seen a few with warped and properly delaminated necks, I couldn’t say for sure if this was down to a particular time period or if it’s just luck of the draw. 

[AndyTravis]

They made their truss rods out of chalk for a while apparently 🤔😉😂

[FDC484950]

I’ve had a ton of Warwick from the original 80’s paddle headstock up to one made just last year. I don’t think they’ve upped their game or had any particular rough patches in terms of build quality. Personally I wasn’t impressed with their move to non-replaceable truss rods as it means sanding off the fingerboard on an NT model, and they don’t seem very reliable. The barrel jack socket is rubbish and failed on every Warwick I owned apart from the latest one. Neck profiles varied over time but generally th pre 2000-ish models were slimmer. The current custom shop models have (I think) 3 different profiles on offer. I’ve moved away from them as a brand as I never found them very good at being set up with a low action - and without any other neck reinforcement some necks develop a warp or a lot of relief near the headstock. In terms of craftsmanship, I’ve always though they wer very consistent.

[Kev]

Id change the range 1997 - 2009

There were some gems made during that time, but all the stereotype negatives come from basses built during this time, especially early 00s.  Baseball bats, bendy necks, ridiculous nut designs, neck dive etc .  All things the vintage golden era models and new models do not suffer from!

[Kev]

1 minute ago, FDC484950 said:

I’ve had a ton of Warwick from the original 80’s paddle headstock up to one made just last year. I don’t think they’ve upped their game or had any particular rough patches in terms of build quality. Personally I wasn’t impressed with their move to non-replaceable truss rods as it means sanding off the fingerboard on an NT model, and they don’t seem very reliable. The barrel jack socket is rubbish and failed on every Warwick I owned apart from the latest one. Neck profiles varied over time but generally th pre 2000-ish models were slimmer. The current custom shop models have (I think) 3 different profiles on offer. I’ve moved away from them as a brand as I never found them very good at being set up with a low action - and without any other neck reinforcement some necks develop a warp or a lot of relief near the headstock. In terms of craftsmanship, I’ve always though they wer very consistent.

Interesting.  My thumb can get ridiculously low, far lower than I could be comfortable playing!  They are a bit different to set up right, particularly the older ones.

[FDC484950]

Maybe you got lucky. I’ve had over 15 over the years and I know how to set up instruments. The fours are easier but personally I don’t think some of their laminated necks are rigid enough for 5- and 6-strings

[Kev]

17 minutes ago, FDC484950 said:

Maybe you got lucky. I’ve had over 15 over the years and I know how to set up instruments. The fours are easier but personally I don’t think some of their laminated necks are rigid enough for 5- and 6-strings

Anything early 00s and I'll easily believe it, but the removable truss rod instruments, I could always easily get back bow so relief would never have been an issue, possibly fret issue or some qc with bridge depth? 

[Kev]

I'd actually expand on a direct answer to the OP and say they really upped their game with the 2013 instruments. They brought back wenge alongside the IFT and luminescent dots, thinner neck, state of the art machinery and a real reduction in number of top end basses due really made a difference, the new instruments are as high quality as anything available. The vintage have their handmade charm and I love them, but the standards of the new basses are very, very high. 

Edited August 15, 2018 by Kev

[Al Krow]

The GPS = Teambuilt / Made in Germany came out in the summer of 2015 (and post your 2013 improvement date!). 

Am I correct that the difference between the GPS models and the Custom Shop is simply that the GPS have "standard" (high end) parts and finishes, whereas the Custom Shop allows for a much wider combination of parts and finishes; but they are both fully "German" made?

The GPS, whilst being cheaper than Custom Shop, are certainly not cheap new e.g. a SS1 is around £2k.

But I'm sensing Kev from what your saying, that in terms of quality, I'd be better off going for a used GPS SS1 than a 2006 vintage "German" SS1?

Edited August 15, 2018 by Al Krow

[Kev]

It gets messy.  GPS are the budget german built basses, previously built in Korea.  No brass, cheaper woods etc.  Build quality will still be excellent, but the 2006 model was top of the range at the time.  Id go for the GPS, but only if its priced well.

[Al Krow]

3 minutes ago, Kev said:

It gets messy.  GPS are the budget german built basses, previously built in Korea.  No brass, cheaper woods etc.  Build quality will still be excellent, but the 2006 model was top of the range at the time.  Id go for the GPS, but only if its priced well.

But the PUPs and electrics are the same as the Custom Shop?

[Delberthot]

Every coloured stained wood Warwick I've seen has worn horribly and usually accompanied by several gouges in the body. It might just be me, I might just be seeing the bad examples but I've never seen a bad natural or solid poly finish one

[Kev]

26 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

But the PUPs and electrics are the same as the Custom Shop?

Yup, standard MEC gold pickups and preamps, but doubt you'll get a 3 band on a GPS, likely just 2

[JBP]

I've been playing nothing but Warwicks since I bought my Corvette in 1999, and that was  a peach and was my main bass for about 15 years. In that time I have had no major problems at all until last year when I had the nut and the battery connector replaced, but for an 18 year old bass that's not bad. 

In recent years I have owned a few different Wick's including a 2005 Streamer Stage 1 fiver which was a great bass, well built, no problems, nice low action, but it did have the chunky neck, it was a great sounding bass but I just didn't get on with the neck so it got moved on for a  2008 Corvette $$. That was a great bass but ultimately I found it lacked the mid range and the growl I wanted. So next came a Thumb which was great but that got traded with @Kev for another $$ this time with a 3 band EQ which just brings the thing to life, I've hardly touched any of my other basses since I got it.

I think the point I am trying to make is that personally I have never had any major problems with any of the Warwicks I have owned apart from the sound and the ergonomics of specific instruments, and thats down to my personal taste not anything being wrong with the instruments themselves. As ever if you can try before you buy. The baseball bat necks are truly horrible in my opinion but you may like them.

 

 

[Al Krow]

5 hours ago, Kev said:

Yup, standard MEC gold pickups and preamps, but doubt you'll get a 3 band on a GPS, likely just 2

 

4 hours ago, JBP said:

...this time with a 3 band EQ which just brings the thing to life, I've hardly touched any of my other basses since I got it.

Good point about the 3 band EQ. My Ibby SR Premiums all have 3 band and I really do appreciate having that amount of control and it is, for sure, a step up from a 2 band EQ (which I've had in a couple of basses e.g. my former Sandberg TM4). In particular, at what stage did Warwick introduce the 3 band EQs but it sounds like they're only available on the Custom Shop models in the more recent stuff?

That's a real shame about the GPS. You'd have thought in a circa £2k (new) bass Warwick could stretch to better quality woods and a 3 band EQ; but I guess they need some excuse for charging nearer £4k for a Custom Shop bass!

4 hours ago, JBP said:

...a  2008 Corvette $$. That was a great bass but ultimately I found it lacked the mid range and the growl I wanted.

Interesting that you found that. I had a 2007 Corvette $$ 5er and didn't find it particularly lacking in 'growl' (although it did have just a 2 band EQ) and that MEC Warwick growl is a big part of what makes a Warwick a 'Warwick' for me. I guess you're saying that the Thumb you played and later Warwicks have this in greater abundance?

4 hours ago, JBP said:

The baseball bat necks are truly horrible in my opinion but you may like them.

We're on the same page here! I love the skinny necks and playability of my Ibby SR1800 (and its Nordstrand big single PUPs are the closest to a Warwick growl that I have in any of my basses). 

What period were the "baseball bat necks" and when did they disappear?

Edited August 16, 2018 by Al Krow

[JBP]

I cant say precisely when they changed back to the slimmer neck profile my 2008 $$ was a fat one, my 2009 Thumb and the 2010 $$ were/are lovely and slim and exactly the same profile as my 99 Corvette. As Kev said these days they offer a choice of three different profiles.

To say the 2008 $$ lacked growl is probably wrong but I would say it was the least Warwick sounding Wick I have ever owned. Its all subjective but personally I have found the Thumb and the Corvette to be the ones that largest dose of the Warwick growl. My 99 Corvette Standard is the growlyest (im not sure that's a real word) Wick I have ever played, its  two MEC single coils have so much mid range punch the 2 band EQ is perfect. To me the Corvette is a really angry jazz bass.

I found the 2008 $$ to have so much low end from the MEC MM pickups that I was always rolling of the bottom end and then a  lot of the mid range growl would go with it. My current $$ is a different beast, the woods are different 50/50 Tiger Wood and ash body, two Bartolini MM pickups instead of MEC's and the three band MEC EQ. It has that Warwick sound but something else as well, and the mid range of the EQ is set at just the right frequency to bring all the anger out lol.

 

[FDC484950]

One thing that Warwick do better than almost any other manufacturer IMHO is getting the B string to sound super-tight on a 34” scale. I never once thought I needed an extended scale instrument and recently had the chance to compare like for like with a Dingwall - to my ears the Warwick was better. It could be down to several factors, but the angled headstock and bridge/embedded tail piece are, I think the main reason.

[Grangur]

I play, pretty much, nothing but Warwicks dated from the 2000 to 2011. Over all I've owned 9 and only ever had minor issues with any of those, except 1. Most of the Warwicks I've owned have been with me more than 5 years.

The minor issues have been the silly nuts with the tabs on the sides, a knob that had poor gold finish and a jack socket.

The 1 bass with a major issue was a neck through with a twisted neck. The neck had spent a long time without tension on the truss rod. So what happened was a result of poor ownership.

I regularly go to Bulgaria and there's a shop I visit with an amazing array of brand new Warwick basses.  I've tried a good few out and wouldn't swap any of mine for a new Warwick. The tone just isn't there. The new ones simply don't "sing" for me like my older ones do.

Upped their game? Not in my estimation. The new ones all feel like plastic to me.

[4000]

16 hours ago, FDC484950 said:

Maybe you got lucky. I’ve had over 15 over the years and I know how to set up instruments. The fours are easier but personally I don’t think some of their laminated necks are rigid enough for 5- and 6-strings

I've had 4 (2 Dolphin Pro 1s, a Pro II and a Streamer) and they could all be set up with the strings on the frets. The only one that initially had an issue was the Steamer S1, a 1991 model with what apparently at the time were dodgy truss rods. Martin Petersen added a washer, tweaked it a bit and it was fine from then on.  

[4000]

I'll add that all the best Warwicks I've played have been '91 or earlier, although I haven't played much that's very recent (last few years). My '91 Dolphin was miles better than my '96 despite them looking and feeling almost identical, bar the colour of the hardware. And the early Thumbs are some of my favourite ever basses; if not for some ergonomic issues (I have trouble with the tiny body and short upper horn) I'd happily use them as my choice of "modern" bass.

[Mog]

I've had a good few over the years. All Streamers. The only one I have left is the original model Standard which was a 2000 build. Its has outshone any of the GPS basses I've played. Overall I've never had too many issues with them but their customer service is absolutely dreadful. If I was to go back to them I'd be looking at an early to mid 90's model. For me they've turned into the BMW of the bass world. 

[grenadillabama]

my Corvette has some serious growl and balances as well as any Jazz or Precision. It is heavy. Recently I picked  up a used Corvette 5 and it is a back breaker. That bubinga wood comes from Africa and surely it must be getting scarce ?? The store owner loves Fender and just wanted to be rid of this brownie ! I bought it a hard case. 

[Raslee]

20 hours ago, Kev said:

Yup, standard MEC gold pickups and preamps, but doubt you'll get a 3 band on a GPS, likely just 2

I’ve got a S1 GPS. Brilliant bass and lots of tonal variety considering its only 2 band. I’ve owned Corvettes 90’s & 00’s, Fortress, Thumb and $$ and I have to say my 2017 GPS S1 is my favourite Warwick to date, light too  

[bassbora]

I have been playing Warwicks only since '97 (I had a fretless Stingray I did not like) and my preference has always been old neck through models.  I did have a '04 FNA Jazzman 5 string and I really liked it.  It had the baseball bat neck but it did not bother me at all.  I gigged it for few years.  The build quality was great and it was a very solid bass.

I traded it for a Streamer Stage 2 '91 which I have to say I prefer a lot more and sounds way better.  I have '89 Thumb 5 and 6 and a '91 Stage 1 and all these basses cut through a band mix a lot better than the FNA.  I have no idea why.  The B string on all five basses has been rock solid and nothing has ever failed on these basses on a gig.  I gig around 2 - 4 times a month and I rotate all basses and I could not consider any other bass.  I have no experience of the newer models but I would think they are very good.  I just happen to prefer the older ones.