I've received quite a few notes from folks asking about the Barker Bass and some people ask, "Who is the target audience for this bass?" Others have been more blunt and simply asked, "What's the point?" :rolleyes: These are both fair questions so I'll attempt to answer them here.

The Barker Bass has two distinct advantages. Tone and Comfort.

* Tone:
Due to the design of the bass (that beautiful body is chambered, not solid), it has a tone unmatched by most basses available today. As Bruce Jacobs said in his Bass Guitar Magazine review …

"The Barker came across broad and juicy in a blues four-piece, and everything I played at a crosssoverjazz/R&B quintet gig - from standards to Tower of Power funk - was a joy. was variously punchier, crisper, sweeter, or rounder than my standard 4- and 5-strings. It reminded me somewhat of a good, vintage Fender Precision: It sounds good by itself, but it sounds sooo right on the bandstand."

* Comfort:
A by product of the chambered body is that it is larger than the average Electric Bass. At this size, it is obviously impractical to wear around ones neck, so we put it on a stand! As Dave Zaworski said in his Downbeat Magazine review …

"Barker developed the idea for a fretted upright after experiencing wrist problems while playing bass guitar, and subsequently has designed the Barker bass for playing comfort. The bass has a free-standing design, so players don't have to hold it up-that's taken care of by a heavy duty stand with an attachment that locks in to a socket on the back of the bass.

This helps to keep a player's physical contact with the bass to a minimum; arms, hands and wrists are held in natural positions and are only focused on playing the bass, not holding it. The minimal physical contact also keeps the bass's resonance from being dampened; the sound rings clear."

Now, those are the objective measures. A lot of folks also think it looks great and it definitely garners a great deal of attention -- people always say, "Hey - what is THAT!" (Don't be fooled however, the looks catch your eye but the sound grabs your ear!)

So - who plays this thing?

Our target player is several-fold:

The bass player who wants a phenomenal-sounding bass [i](with awesome tone and sustain) in a comfortable package.
The bass player who wants the appearance/vibe of an upright without having to learn the longer scale of a traditional upright.
The bass player who wants a beautiful, hand-crafted piece of workmanship that is pleasing to the eye, ear, and touch.
The Barker bass is not a replacement for/competitor to the traditional electric bass OR the traditional upright bass -- it's a whole new breed of cat. And she purrs quite nicely! :cool:

http://www.dixontech.com/NABA/posting-pic.jpg

Let's say a 5 string in a pretty basic finish, like a natural ash? with a nice quality gig bag.

How much would something like this weigh.

Larry Kaye

Here's what I do with mine. I will use it in solo shows to do duets with myself. I use the Barker for fretted bass sounds and I have a fretless strapped on so I can loop the two and get some neat things going. Also, I can have it onstage with a band and have the mike running across and use that bass to sing and play. It makes for an interesting visual on both fronts and makes sense from an execution standpoint as well. Very handy thing.

Let's say a 5 string in a pretty basic finish, like a natural ash? with a nice quality gig bag. How much would something like this weigh.Hi Larry--I'll answer your questions in order. (Geez, sounds like a press conference.)

Hanging on the wall of my shop are about 17 bass bodies which, the casual observer usually assumes, are "ready to be assembled." Actually they are all basses that were substandard and got disassembled and I keep them around as my friends. Each one taught me something.

One is ash. It was just too heavy. So while I would certainly build you a custom bass in ash if you wanted one, your question about weight suggests you're sensitive to that part of the equation.

What I ended up with, after all that trial and error, was the cherry front, alder core piece and alder back. It was the sweetest sound to my ear, material I can count on getting, and far from the heaviest combination. (Lightest was alder all the way, and I still have one of those which was my own player for a year or so. Nice enough and plenty sweet, but it lacks the crispness that the cherry brings.)

Gig is bag included, as well as the stand and a bag for it as well. Lovely maroon nylon fabric.

Prices: You're hearing this from the factory now, and these will all be Manufacturers Suggested Retail Price:

4 string fretted--$3700
fretless 3820
lined fretless 3880

5 string fretted--$4005
fretless 4065
lined fretless 4125

Weightwise, the instrument is about 17 lbs.

Thanks for the questions and for posting on the forum. And for giving me a break from the Tyranny of Sandpaper!

Kindly,

Lee

The Barker being thin and free-standing is huge. Along the lines of what Trip was saying, I do lots of gigs which require stylistic shifts on a dime with no notice. For instance, I can have my fretted 5-string on to play something by 50 Cent, and then hit my A-B switch when the bandleader abruptly calls "The Best is Yet to Come" and get a nice, dark woody tone from my fretless Barker while still wearing the other bass.

'Tis a groovy thing, ain't it? :)

I have fairly successful been able to transition to a variety of fretless basses, both 34 and 35 inch scale. I prefer 35 now as my fretted bass is a 35 incher. I know the NS is a 41 incher and would in my mnd be quite a challenge just from the increased scale length. I know most of the other EUB's are 41+ inch scale lengths also except for Kydd, some others, and your's.

Can you give me some sort of comparative information about your bass's tone or playability, or any any objective AND subjective information that could help us decide, sight unseen, no playing advance that spending $4000 on your bass is a well spent investment vs purhaps less expensive alternatives offered in both 35 and 41 in scale lengths?

If you want to anwer me directly and not publicly, I would welcome a PM. It's strictly up to you folks.

Thanks

Larry

These basses are very attractive, and the idea seems good. Is the move from 'around the neck' to 'floor standing' straightforward, or is there still a learning curve. It looks like the transition should be pretty straightforward, but I'd like input from those who've tried.

Can you give me some sort of comparative information about your bass's tone or playability, or any any objective AND subjective information that could help us decide, sight unseen, no playing advance that spending $4000 on your bass is a well spent investment vs purhaps less expensive alternatives offered in both 35 and 41 in scale lengths?

Thanks

LarryThanks for the question, Larry. Happy to give that a go from a guy who (a) made the transition, and (b) thinks a lot about the kinds of things you're asking.

First, my own experience: After 20 minutes of playing my first Barker bass, I felt at home. This may not be typical, because I had been thinking about it a long time--like the athletic equivalent of imagining the home run or the perfect Olympic dive--but from that moment it was going back and playing a bass guitar that felt strange.


Here's the second part: The Barker Bass is, in electronics and physics, a bass guitar. Happens to be on end, so that the sonic advantages of the body can be fully realized. So there is much less new real estate for your fingers to learn, compared to an EUB.

The notion that people often have about an upright is that the strings, bridge and fingerboard have to be configured that way in order for it to be an upright bass.

Let's look at that notion. The orchestral bass grew out of the violin, which is made to be bowed. Pizzicato playing on the violin is neither very easy nor very (subjective) pretty.
The bowed notes, however, can be achingly beautiful.

So the bass was made on the same mold, so to speak, only larger. The bridge configuration is designed so the individual strings can be bowed. Pizzicato playing was a secondary thought.

Now we've reached a place where the bowing of an upright in, say, jazz settings is what, 1% of the time?

So if that 1% is important to the player, the NS and Kydd and Azola and many other fine instruments are just the ticket.

If, however, the easy transfer of both left and right hand movements is a higher priority, then the Barker rises to the top.

There are other advantages here, and I don't want to launch into a sales pitch (I don't have a gold belt and white shoes and those really annoying sunglasses) but I will mention that, the older I get, the more I appreciate not carrying an instrument on a strap. Ok, end of sales pitch there.

You mentioned tone. Such a wonderful subject, and so wonderfully subjective. I'll offer one story, then let others who are familiar with the quality of the instrument's sound check in with their opinions if they are so inclined.

Recently at church my bass was heard by a local guy who has been a choir director, doubtless has some musical training, is an excellent singer, and whose wife plays the cello in a local string quartet. What did he have to say about this electrified bass that looks like nothing else? "What a great sound you get out of that," he said, "Overtones on overtones."

I hope I've not been to windy, too exclusive or too biased. And thanks again for the questions!

Kindly,
Lee Barker

Is the move from 'around the neck' to 'floor standing' straightforward, or is there still a learning curve. Yes - there is a learning curve ... about 5 minutes!

That may read as facetious but I am serious. I have personally seen it time after time -- your brain and your body need about 5 minutes to recalibrate and after that, it's very natural.

Lee was interviewed on this topic last year and this is what he had to say about it ...

"Our experience at trade shows and clinics has told this story uncountable times. A bass player walks up and looks, never having seen anything quite like this.

His head tips one way, then the next. When it returns to vertical, it means he has processed the information his eyes picked up ...

Frets ... Upright ... Electric :eyebrow:

It takes some time for the brain to send down the conclusion, as well as a little editorial comment: 'These things could go together, but we have no examples in the files. And the man standing there beside the bass looks harmless enough.'

"Would you like to try?" I inquire.

"I don't play upright," is the answer. The other lobe of the brain rattles the report, and hisses, "TRY IT!"

So he steps up, tries it, and looks up grinning about 9 notes later saying, "WOW! This is COOL!" :hyper:

Seriously - that's about the way it works. I've seen it happen countless times and it's always fun to watch!

I got my fretless Barker 4 in February '05, but with a very full work schedule and a new baby at home there was not a lot of time to try it out on my own. I got a call for a jazz gig and took it mainly as an excuse to take this bass out and learn it.
On the job it immediately sounded and felt great to me. With the proper right-hand touch, I was able to emulate a sound and concept I could only ever DREAM about playing on my doghouse.
Provided I wasn't reading and could look at the neck, intonation was no problem right from the start, between the familiar scale and the fret lines. Now that I have been jobbing on it for close to a year, I am able to get similar good intonation without staring at the neck. But that's the same issue you would encounter playing any kind of bass.

You may have heard this expressed by others in this forum but it bears repeating: The Barker, specifically a fretless one, provides a high-quality alternative both in aesthetics and sound for those of us who don't have the time, energy or inclination to invest in the maintenance of traditional upright chops.

So for me, that's the point.

I've responded to the question, "Why should I play a Barker?" countless times over the last year. My incredible association with Lee Barker and "Barker Musical Instruments" began in October ' 04. I think I'm the guy in the "Barker Family" who will always be associated with the word "TONE". I can't help using the word excessively, but there is no other bass out there that has it like this baby. The amazing tone, with everything "flat" on the amp, no EQ tweaking at all, was the first thing that knocked me right out when I played my first bass line on a Barker.
So understandably that's my first reply, next comes ease in playability. I'm not an up-right player and this baby felt right at home from the first note. When I took my Barker to a rehearsal for the first time, the band saw me bring it in and asked, "Oh, is that your new Barker? Cool we can't wait to hear this amazing bass you've been raving about." The band went on about their business setting up for the rehearsal, a few minutes later I was plugged in and started warming up running through some lines by myself. Suddenly the room went silent, except for me and my Barker, the whole band and a few spectators immediately turned around, eyes wide and jaws dropped in amazment, all they could say was, "That's one INCREDIBLE sounding bass, now we get it". Blown away? Ya think?
You think this is a beautiful instrument to look at? Wait 'til you hear her sing. If you think you've got tone now with your current bass, you better check this honey out.

Doug Mancini

I think the five minute standard is pretty accurate.

I've seen people fight the urge to stand vertically in a horizontal position (if you can picture that) and that just flat doesn't work. Relaxation is the key. Folks that can't get it (I've only met one...) can't get there because they're still trying to stand at a 45 degree angle from the instrument, which is almost as painful to watch as it is to do.

But yeah, it takes about five minutes (I'd actually say less than that) for the player to stop and relax. That's when they get it. From then on it's just fun. That's the extent of the learning curve, really.

Regarding "tone," I wish I could say something that hasn't already been said. The comments that I get, particularly when I'm playing my fretless, are almost always sheer amazement at the quality and depth of tone that come out of these instruments. "Deep," "Thick" and "Woody" are common themes. I think it sounds like butter. Velvet butter.

And I don't even know what that is...

These basses are very attractive, and the idea seems good. Is the move from 'around the neck' to 'floor standing' straightforward, or is there still a learning curve. It looks like the transition should be pretty straightforward, but I'd like input from those who've tried.

My own experience: there was no transition. The Barker was instantly easier and more comfortable for me to play.

I have since adapted an old Hohner headless to be played vertically on a stand.

Frankly, if anyone knows where I could get a stand that would hold all my other electric bass guitars in a vertical playing position, I'd really like to know about it. I've studied Gracie stands online and I don't think they will work.
thanks, ron

As to who would play one, I might be the kind of person who would.

I am starting to realize I am attracted to new and good ideas.

I used a PalmPilot back when US Robotics owned them, before they sold them to 3Com, then to Palm, etc. I switched to an HP Jornada before HP bought Compaq (now I have an HP iPaq handheld). I am writing this message on an IBM/Lenovo TABLET PC, my pickup is a Honda Ridgeline, my car is a Toyota Prius, and I was listening to music on flash and hard drive players years before the ipod craze.

Speaking of music, my preferred amp system for small gigs is Bose's Cylindrical Radiator system, my larger gig rig is a Demeter head driving an Accugroove el Whappo ... I guess I tend to like to break away from the crowd when I see a good idea and I think the Barker upright bass might be another one.

I think it looks GREAT; in fact looks would probably be the main reason I'd get one. It has a style that fits great for some gigs without compromising playability or tone to get that style. I can see me playing this with horns in a swing band, with acoustic strings in small folk and blue grass gigs, with drums and piano in smoky jazz and blues clubs, etc.

The Barker basses just seem really fun to me, and since fun is still the main reason I play, I'm intrigued.

The fun factor is exremely high. I can tell you that.

The fun factor is exremely high. I can tell you that.Trip -

I'm glad you made that point -- I've often thought it but I wasn't sure if it was appropriate to say.

I have demo'ed the Barker, I have worked trade show booths with it, and I have had people over to my home to play mine. No matter what the location or situation, whenever people play the Barker Bass, they break out into a HUGE SMILE!!! :D

I'm not sure if it's due to ...

* "Hey -- I can play this after all!" or;
* "Lookit me, I'm actually playing an Upright!" or;
* "Wow -- this is really comfortable!"

Whatever it is, I think there is an element of FUN that comes with the Barker Bass that touches everyone.

It really is a cool instrument! :hyper:

maybe i'm missing something here,but for what a barker bass costs,you could get a good upright(REAL) and be able to get another electric and a fancy coffee table to stand it on end and play it on. the upright would go in your practice room and the other two items in your living room.we are talking about eye candy and art deco here, are we not?really?

Thanks, Hertzdem, for the thoughtful and well posed question. Dwayne developed this thread just for this kind of dialogue, and I welcome it.

Let me tackle a side issue first. You describe a "good upright" as "REAL." We all understand and are visualizing the instrument you are describing, but is it REAL?

The double bass evolved as a member of the violin family of acoustic instruments, designed to be bowed. In an orchestral setting, that bass is bowed 99% of the time. The occasional pizzicato note is a novelty.

In a jazz or non-orchestral/chamber music setting, it is played pizzicato 99% of the time and bowed 1%. Does that make it the best suited instrument for music other than that for which it was intended?

So I would submit that, in an orchestra, it would be the Real bass to use. Beyond that, in any other setting one might look at the ideal instrument requirements from a player standpoint, an audience standpoint, and a house/mix/recording standpoint.


You suggest that standing a bass guitar on a coffee table would be the equivalent of playing a Barker Bass. The most significant downside of your suggestion is you would lose the coatrack/hatrack feature of the Barker, which makes it a most desirable dual-purpose addition to one's living room furniture ensemble.

The second thing you'd miss is tone. I'm noodling on Barker Basses a little every day so I get lulled into thinking that what I am hearing is just "a bass sound." Then I do something like go hear Brian Ritchie play his Barker in concert and I am floored by the characteristics in that tone that just aren't there in a bass guitar.

The difference, of course, is the chambered body and what it contributes to the aural result. To argue that a good bass guitar could sound as good might be a good place to be provided that bass guitar is not held against the human body, which does such a thorough job of damping vibration. Grab a tuning fork and see what I mean.

There are other posts on this forum from owners who speak very eloquently about the tonal possibilities from a Barker. I yield to them.

Finally, he said, apologizing for the length of this post, look at what Leo Fender said when the REAL bass was not able to support the already-invented Les Paul electric guitar: "I will solve this problem by doing four things: I'll shorten the scale to 34 inches, I'll use metal strings with magnetic pickups, I'll add frets and I'll put it in a guitar shape."

And he did, and the Fender Precision Bass remains a beacon shining its light on the memory of a truly brilliant innovator in the music world.

Now if Leo had done just the first three things, what do you suppose he might have come up with?

I don't consider myself a great innovator at all--in effect, I just subtracted something from an already great idea. And I think it sounds pretty good. And I'll hang my hat on that statement any day!

a real upright is a real upright(as we envision it in our clever little minds)-meaning made of wood and played pizzacato &/or arco(having nothing to do with price,designer appeal,or even sound quality,at this point.) from there it gets personal.always personal.but it always remains an upright bass. i submit that there are endless electric basses &/or eub's that can fulfill the need for this type of musical application better than an overpriced fancy coffee table, and too many affluent "pioneers" out there who will invest in these atrocities,thinking they're playing something revolutionary! skip the bit about orchestral use & upright bass nomenclature,and try peddling this act to Ron Carter or Charlie Haden! CALL IT WHAT IT IS .

does this instrument appreciate in value over time like a vintage fender precision? sorry,i'm not buyin' it.

* Tone:
Due to the design of the bass (that beautiful body is chambered, not solid), it has a tone unmatched by most basses available today. As Bruce Jacobs said in his Bass Guitar Magazine review …

"The Barker came across broad and juicy in a blues four-piece, and everything I played at a crosssoverjazz/R&B quintet gig - from standards to Tower of Power funk - was a joy. was variously punchier, crisper, sweeter, or rounder than my standard 4- and 5-strings. It reminded me somewhat of a good, vintage Fender Precision: It sounds good by itself, but it sounds sooo right on the bandstand."

* Comfort:
A by product of the chambered body is that it is larger than the average Electric Bass. At this size, it is obviously impractical to wear around ones neck, so we put it on a stand! As Dave Zaworski said in his Downbeat Magazine review …

"Barker developed the idea for a fretted upright after experiencing wrist problems while playing bass guitar, and subsequently has designed the Barker bass for playing comfort. The bass has a free-standing design, so players don't have to hold it up-that's taken care of by a heavy duty stand with an attachment that locks in to a socket on the back of the bass.

This helps to keep a player's physical contact with the bass to a minimum; arms, hands and wrists are held in natural positions and are only focused on playing the bass, not holding it. The minimal physical contact also keeps the bass's resonance from being dampened; the sound rings clear."

Now, those are the objective measures. A lot of folks also think it looks great and it definitely garners a great deal of attention -- people always say, "Hey - what is THAT!" (Don't be fooled however, the looks catch your eye but the sound grabs your ear!)

So - who plays this thing?

Our target player is several-fold:

The bass player who wants a phenomenal-sounding bass [i](with awesome tone and sustain) in a comfortable package.
The bass player who wants the appearance/vibe of an upright without having to learn the longer scale of a traditional upright.
The bass player who wants a beautiful, hand-crafted piece of workmanship that is pleasing to the eye, ear, and touch.
The Barker bass is not a replacement for/competitor to the traditional electric bass OR the traditional upright bass -- it's a whole new breed of cat. And she purrs quite nicely! :cool:

http://www.dixontech.com/NABA/posting-pic.jpg[/QUOTE]

reminded one reviewer of a vintage fender precision? does the barker bass appreciate in value like a vintage precision?if you used a vintage precision (which,by the way costs about the same,but continually increases in value ,unlike,the barker which would immediately decrease from it's retail value by 1/2 as soon as it goes out the door.)you'd have the real deal and not have to settle for inferior sound quality and, having to attach it to a camera tripod.

a real upright is a real upright(as we envision it in our clever little minds)-meaning made of wood and played pizzacato &/or arco(having nothing to do with price,designer appeal,or even sound quality,at this point.) from there it gets personal.always personal.but it always remains an upright bass. i submit that there are endless electric basses &/or eub's that can fulfill the need for this type of musical application better than an overpriced fancy coffee table, and too many affluent "pioneers" out there who will invest in these atrocities,thinking they're playing something revolutionary! skip the bit about orchestral use & upright bass nomenclature,and try peddling this act to Ron Carter or Charlie Haden! CALL IT WHAT IT IS .

Well, no instrument will appeal to everyone - otherwise there would be instruments we ALL like and instruments we ALL hate and nothing in between, what fun would THAT be?

Funny to read your post after just looking at the Barker Bass site and thinking that I'd like to check one out in person. The idea of a fretted upright really appeals to me. I believe I might have played a fretless version briefly while on the road a couple months back... but, even though I played string bass and went to college majoring in music with string bass as my main instrument I haven't played one since. And getting a "real" string bass holds no interest for me.

Something like this that offers the ability to play quickly without having to get my acoustic chops up to speed AND gives another alternative to use for acoustic shows other than an acoustic bass guitar appeals to me. And, I would think - many other players as well.

I'd think the market for this type of bass is somewhat limited because of what it is, but I haven't seen anything to suggest they're marketing it as anything other than what it is. But then, I always like overpriced fancy coffee tables. And playing revolutionary atrocities. Viva the revolution!

:D

... I'd like to check one out in person. The idea of a fretted upright really appeals to me ...Dave -

I live in the Twin cities but I get to Winona/LaCrosse on a semi-regular basis. I am also a regular reader of your "DaveOnBass" website. (Reading your site turned me on to Dave's Guitars in LaCrosse.)

All that said, if you'd like to try out the Barker (I have two), let me know and we'll make something happen.

Drop me a PM at your convenience!

Dave -

I live in the Twin cities but I get to LaCrosse on a semi-regular basis. I am also a regular reader of your "DaveOnBass" website. (Reading your site turned me on to Dave's Guitars in LaCrosse.)

All that said, if you'd like to try out the Barker (I have two), let me know and well make something happen.

Drop me a PM at your convenience!

Well, we'd have to agree to NO NFL discussion based on that there avatar of yours... PM coming...

:D

a real upright is a real upright(as we envision it in our clever little minds)-meaning made of wood and played pizzacato &/or arco(having nothing to do with price,designer appeal,or even sound quality,at this point.) from there it gets personal.always personal.but it always remains an upright bass. i submit that there are endless electric basses &/or eub's that can fulfill the need for this type of musical application better than an overpriced fancy coffee table, and too many affluent "pioneers" out there who will invest in these atrocities,thinking they're playing something revolutionary! skip the bit about orchestral use & upright bass nomenclature,and try peddling this act to Ron Carter or Charlie Haden! CALL IT WHAT IT IS .

What it is is fun. What it does is sound really good. Dear fellow, it takes more guts to make friends than it does to make enemies. Lee Barker is a nice fellow, doing something that he believes in. If you don't like it, or think it is silly then say just that and please move on. Have a nice day or night. Later.

What it is is fun. What it does is sound really good. Dear fellow, it takes more guts to make friends than it does to make enemies. Lee Barker is a nice fellow, doing something that he believes in. If you don't like it, or think it is silly then say just that and please move on. Have a nice day or night. Later.+1 - Nicely put, Trip.

Out of respect and deference to Lee Barker, I'll take the high road here.

In my opinion, the Barker Bass is a unique, awesome-sounding, wonderful-playing, great-feeling instrument. It's crafted with care and respect by one of the finest gentlemen I've ever had the pleasure of knowing. We like to keep this forum consistent with that approach.

I'll simply say that if you don't like the Barker bass, fine. If you have constructive questions/suggestions, fine. If you want to have postitive conversation, fine. Gentlemen can have spirited discussion and even disagree -- but we must do so with respect and dignity.

Agressive attitudes, condescending comments, and the casting of aspersions are not welcome here. We respectfully ask that visitors please govern themselves accordingly.

First I want to make sure it's clear that I'm not really an unbiased reviewer here. It's not a coincidence that Lee Barker and I have the same last name, so I'm certainly not trying to sneak in under the radar as an anonymous reviewer.

I think the great thing about musicians is that everyone has their own idea of what the perfect instrument is for them. The sometimes unfortunate side effect of that is that quite often it means that we decide in our minds not only what the best instrument is for US, but also for everybody else.

While I understand your point, I would challenge you to read further into this forum and hear some of the testimonials of a lot of different people that were just as skeptical as you are but came away from their first encounter absolutely SOLD. Sometimes within the first five minutes. I've seen it happen!

I think your concerns about the price tag would be a lot more valid if my dad was staffing his workshop with 12 year old illegal immigrants while lighting up a big fat cuban with a hundred dollar bill from the back of his Bentley. I wouldn't like that guy or his product either, but in this case this is, at its core, a one man operation. The price is very much reflective of the actual cost in labor, materials, and shop expenses, and trust me - nobody is getting rich on Lee's design. But when you buy a Barker Bass, you're buying a piece of the owner, and that's something that a lot of people have mentioned when talking about what they love about their BB.

Nothing would ever be accomplished in this world if it wasn't for people who asked why, so we all appreciate the input. Hopefully someday you'll get a chance to play a Barker on your own. It might change your opinion, and then again...it might not.

i appreciate that it's fun and sounds good,and mr. barker is a swell fellow,my dear fellow,and i have played one! my standpoint on it is just not a kind one. but,i certainly mean no malice to anyone involved because of my stance on this discussion.i'm a nice guy ,too,i have a wonderful sleeper/sofa i'm selling for 3000.00 .but,i have that much invested in it. really!

i appreciate that it's fun and sounds good,and mr. barker is a swell fellow,my dear fellow,and i have played one! my standpoint on it is just not a kind one. but,i certainly mean no malice to anyone involved because of my stance on this discussion.i'm a nice guy ,too,i have a wonderful sleeper/sofa i'm selling for 3000.00 .but,i have that much invested in it. really!

Your malice towards an inanimate object is laughable. Suppose I went on a contruction forum and pitched a tirade against red pipewrenches. Again, the point was to make your point and move on. Monochrome.

it's not malice,it's a viewpoint i find laughable,but would have seemed just as unagreeable if i had voiced it thusly.i've moved on.bass playing has gone from a skill we have all refined &continue to refine because of a love for it ,to what i think is a grotesque mass marketing media ploy dictating what we need &why. if we do need these prducts,then i suppose they will prove their worth to the industry,just as LEO FENDER did. surely you agree with that(?)

I just got a Barker Bass on loan (thanks Joel!) and I can't put it down. I am having trouble going to work, returning phone calls, or even spending quality time with my lady. Speaking of women, the shape of the Barker is quite curvacious and pleasing to the eye. The sound is also warm and pleasant. But the best thing about it is the ergonomics. Due to a bum shoulder my playing time has been very limited. Now I can play twice as long as before with no pain. So for anyone looking for a high end bass, and particularly those who suffer from physical limitations that affect playing, you owe it to yourself to try one. Now I have to figure out how I'm going to be able to afford to buy one. Thank you Lee Barker for inventing this beautiful instrument! Because of you I can enjoy playing music again.

There's a lot of potential in debate, but before people respond to inflammatory posts--even with the "let's all get along" kinds of responses that so gratify the inflamer--try looking over this article before this forum starts going down the drain, which I've seen too many times:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Trolls

i think debate is good,but, obviously that isn't what this is about. i've trodden on a" buddy" network here,so from now on i'll agree with everything that is discussed and" go with the flow". anybody ever heard"nice guys finish last?" i don't believe it either. well,back to trolling.

i think debate is good,but, obviously that isn't what this is about. i've trodden on a" buddy" network here,so from now on i'll agree with everything that is discussed and" go with the flow". anybody ever heard"nice guys finish last?" i don't believe it either. well,back to trolling.

Notice how provocative this post is. Notice that it performs the opposite of the supposed agreeableness it promises. Notice how hard it is to resist responding with something sympathetic to the effect that we're all actually good and considerate people here. If he then strikes at the person who follows up with a sympathetic response, he successfully pulls off another round and the cycle of reaction will continue.

My kind of response "falls for it" as well, making me a certain class of sucker too.

My kind of response "falls for it" as well, making me a certain class of sucker too.

I fall into that trap from time to time myself, but I've learned from that mistake. I wonder what would happen if we all just ignored him?

look in the mirror,fellas,all for one and one for all! prove i'm wrong,J THE St, BARKER MILLIONS, you guys call attention to my remarks,by rallying arround each other"look what he said now"....etc.-i just stated i don't dig the barker bass-idea,price,sound,what it's supposed to replace(don't say it's not)-that shouldn't matter to anyone who does-it's just one person's opinion-i'm not badrapping anyone here-but, look who is-all of you-frankly,i think no response to anyone's views is the way to go-you won't change mine & i won't change yours-and i don't need the heir to my fortune to post this for me-----whoa!

Notice how provocative this post is. Notice that it performs the opposite of the supposed agreeableness it promises. Notice how hard it is to resist responding with something sympathetic to the effect that we're all actually good and considerate people here. If he then strikes at the person who follows up with a sympathetic response, he successfully pulls off another round and the cycle of reaction will continue.

My kind of response "falls for it" as well, making me a certain class of sucker too. you're right!

x

I'm just spitballing here, but a quality solid body bass handmade by a quality luthier who's not yet world famous would be a bargain at $1200. If you look at the price of options at places like Alembic, each laminate adds a premium of $700-1000 just for the process alone, without considering the wood, so each layer of lamination would be a bargain at, say, $500. The Barker has two laminated layers of alder, bringing the price to $2200. Add the chambering of the body, I don't know, that's *got* to be expensive. I figure it's a bargain at $300, so the total is up to $2500, and that's lowballing it. I haven't even factored in how much the double length body adds to the expense, or how much lamination it takes to produce the Barker's 20-layer core. $2500 as a rock bottom, unjustly low estimate gets close to what I thought was the street price of $3000 or so.

No doubt mass producing them brings the price way down, but that's not even thinkable until there's enough demand. And regardless of the excellent quality of mass produced guitars (I have a couple of Fenders that make me not even think of ordering from their custom shop), handmade always has an edge you can't get any other way, and so commands a premium. Look at Lakland, for example. Unfortunately, the Barker's price point looks to me pretty reasonable and on a par with how the bass guitar market functions. Even the steep depreciation corresponds with the way custom luxury goods in general depreciate, especially guitars, but other kinds of goods too. I'm curious as to why esoteric goods depreciate the way they do from 1st owner to 2nd owner since I've never seen anyone provide a plausible explanation. I'm just glad I could purchase a used Barker because a new one would never have been possible on my budget.

x

what if someone wanted this instrument,but,had to draw the line(financially)as to how aesthetically beautiful he could go with it? would mr. barker build an instrument to his requirements and budget?less of the (admittedlyharsh)"fancy coffeetable" aspect and more of the actual" meat&potatoes" portion of what this thing is all about-what would it have to offer ,soundwise, without the premium giftwrap?

I don't see a lot of fancy coffee table aspects to the Barker Bass. What would you cut out?

With the Barker or any other custom builder for that matter, the value drops because the buyer can just order one exactly the way they want it.

Buyers order custom from Stick Enterprises too. So why does the Stick hold a higher resale value than other custom instruments? The supply issue doesn't make sense to me: I see plenty of used Sticks for sale, and the wait time on a new Stick is comparable to, say, Alembic or other boutiques. I've seen this stuff debated many times, and the simple explanations just never pan out.

Chapman Sticks on the other hand tend to keep a significant amount of their value because the waiting list is fairly long from the "factory".
What's the wait time at other boutiques? Aren't they comparable to Stick? How much difference does six months vs. nine, or twelve make to the resale price? From the explanations I've seen, the factors must be more complex than the simple explanations allow.

The most valuable part of an Alembic is the logo on the headstock. Sure, they're great basses. But there are other manufacturers that build just as good of an instrument. Alembic has the history and brand recognition behind it and have become collectibles.

No doubt--Alembic has built up a lot of cachet and you pay a premium for that. But what explains the steep depreciation the first owner faces at resale? I've seen lots of resentful rants against Alembic for being overpriced, but never a comprehensive plausible accounting for why the market prices such instruments as it does. We should invite a guest business-head who has no emotional connection to guitars to come here and explain these things.

I don't see a lot of fancy coffee table aspects to the Barker Bass. What would you cut out?
it was a hypothetical question. maybe some one who didn,t want/need so much expensive body mass-minimal body,end pin,neck(p/us,etc.)-resulting in much less weight,less expence resulting from body materials and labor, or is that defeating the whole purpose?

it was a hypothetical question. maybe some one who didn,t want/need so much expensive body mass-minimal body,end pin,neck(p/us,etc.)-resulting in much less weight,less expence resulting from body materials and labor, or is that defeating the whole purpose?

Yeah, I think it's defeating the purpose. The key to the bass is the body. There was a hint on the website of a smaller body bass that looked like you would wear it as a "standard" bass. But that's just a guess based on a partial picture.

Edit - actually, if you go to www.barkerbass.com and look at the bass on the top left, it definitely has a much smaller body than the current basses. But, it has the finger rests which would mean that it's meant to be played upright. So, cancel the comment about a barker that is meant to be played "standard".

Edit - actually, if you go to www.barkerbass.com and look at the bass on the top left, it definitely has a much smaller body than the current basses. But, it has the finger rests which would mean that it's meant to be played upright. So, cancel the comment about a barker that is meant to be played "standard".[/QUOTE]

If you mean the "pingpong" image on the far left, that is indeed a segment of the vertical bass, thumbrests and all. However, the image in the red banner? That's the rare B45, a "regular" bass guitar.

Folks urged me to build a bass guitar using the same ideas that came together so pleasantly in the big one. So I did.

Same neck, same pickups, chambered body, same strings. Tom Szell played it and said, "sounds like a very good bass guitar." But play it A-B with the vertical and there's just no comparison. The vertical wins all the marbles in the tone game.

And it in effect proved my point: It's the big body that does the job in the tone department.

Only two B45s were made. Pete and Joel Barker have them.
I enjoyed the experiment but decided to focus on the bass that is unique and way more interesting.

would mr. barker build an instrument to his requirements and budget?less of the (admittedlyharsh)"fancy coffeetable" aspect and more of the actual" meat&potatoes" portion of what this thing is all about-what would it have to offer ,soundwise, without the premium giftwrap?[/QUOTE]


I direct your attention, as they say, to the two threads about the B2. This is an interim experiment that aligns quite nicely with your question.

We phrased it this way here: How can we build a bass that takes advantage of all we've learned from the B1, does no harm to the Barker reputation for quality in all aspects, and still make it significantly more accessible from a price standpoint?

The result is these prototypes, one more of which is being assembled (I hope) this week. (hint designed to build anticipation: this one is a color.



The price there is not reflective of where we'll be on the Brio, which is the final manifestation of the experiments. But it will be less than the B1.

[QUOTE=JimmyTheSaint] I haven't even factored in how much the double length body adds to the expense, or how much lamination it takes to produce the Barker's 20-layer core.


Just a clarification here: Jimmy's bass is an early model with that zillion-layer laminated core. We moved from that to alder for the core, with a subsequent increase in brightness to the tone (to my pleasant surprise). The multi-lam had some advantages, but some significant downsides that led us to the happy results with the alder.

So, Jimmy, hang on to that one--the Smithsonian could call any day! : )

If you mean the "pingpong" image on the far left, that is indeed a segment of the vertical bass, thumbrests and all. However, the image in the red banner? That's the rare B45, a "regular" bass guitar.



Ah, I see. I was looking at the top left image as upside down like you would look down at the instrument when playing it. Stupid on my part. ;-)

This thread has been wide-ranging and interesting.

For a moment I would like to focus on sharing some information which may be of value to a purchaser pondering the price of any instrument.

Most of this will be specific to the Barker Bass but in a wider sense it is offered from the manufacturer's point of view.

Here's some background on three discrete parts of the Barker Bass:

The neck's added costs include the filing and installing of the nut, the laser engraving of the logo, and the manufacture, preparation and installation of the serial numbered truss rod cover.

The stand's added costs include the following:

1. unpack the stand and separate into parts
2. remove decals and hang tags, including adhesive cleanup with solvent
3. remove fingerprints from #2
4. dismantle head and cut off the end of the stud, grind and buff and refinish the tip (three coats) and install o-ring
5. bore for and install second rollpin at head attachment
6. reassemble parts
7. remove fingerprints
8. shrink wrap
9. rebox.

Next, let's take a look at the shipping box for your Barker Bass. It's a custom box. In it there is a foam insert which has the image of the instrument cut out of it. This is an assembled piece of foam of many parts, some adhered, some which install separately before shipping. The instrument goes into a protective plastic sleeve before being placed in the box, along with the stand. In then go two more pieces of eggcrate foam, followed by the gig bags.

I had to purchase the die which cuts the foam, whose final dimensions are roughly 71 x 17 inches.

Before the box leaves, it gets 6 "fragile" stickers and three plastic banding wraps.




The second part of this discussion is Fixed Costs.

First consideration is what it takes to keep the door of the establishment open, regardless of purchase of raw materials or sales of finished product.

This would include lease payment, insurance, and the following utility payments:
power
natural gas (heat)
water/sewer/trash
telephone (land line and cell)
internet connection

Finally we would have to consider once-a-year costs like business license, dues for membership in trade groups, that sort of thing.

This would be the amount of money one would spend if you just came in each work day and turned on the lights, made a pot of coffee, turned up the heat if need be, or ran a fan, and then, 9.5 hours later, went home.

The next category of cost to consider is a hidden one. I call it the "ketchup and mustard" category. Have you ever moved and sold/given away/trashed everything in the kitchen except the plates and spoons? Amazing, wasn't it, how much you had to spend to get the ketchup and the salt and mustard and the mayonnaisse and all that restocked?

So in this category would be glue, finish materials, solvents like naphtha, hand cleaners, gloves, all that stuff.

Then take a look at the equipment in a shop designed to work with wood. Every machine consumes something: drill bits, router/shaper cutters, sandpaper, sawblades. All those eventually have to be replaced or sharpened, and it's an ongoing cost.

Finally in this consideration of costs are advertising/marketing/promotion.

At the bare minimum are ongoing costs like the amazing and delightful Talkbass Forum, including the advertising that cycles through all the forums, and the monthly cost of (a) having a web site hosted, and (b) maintaining the site so it is current and correct.

Add to that any other kind of advertising, typically print.

Finally in this list is a very large number: The cost of going to NAMM once a year (one could go twice). We go to the Winter NAMM, every January. The length of the journey is: 2 day drive, one day setup, 4 day show, 2 day drive home. Add those numbers and subtract one, and you have the amount of hotel stays for the two of us.
The booth costs $2600 plus carpet, electrical upgrades, that sort of thing.

All these costs--from the least obvious, like a local business license, to the cost of financing a purchase of material in a significant quantity to minimize handling, add up to a very real number that must be realized for the company to stay in business.

Thanks for reading this lengthy post. My goal was not to justify, but to edify someone who has not been on the manufacturing end of things so their appreciation of the cost of a handmade object from the US might be a little wider and deeper.

Ok, I deleted anything that could remotely be construed as critical. I wish Mr. Barker the best and maybe someday I'll have the opportunity to try one of his creations.

What are the advantages and disadvantages to the multi-lam core? The tone doesn't seem to any degree "unbright."

If I read you right earlier, Jimmy, yours is alder front and alder back? Now they're cherry front and alder back, and that is a darker tone than the alder/alder.

Tone differences at this point are where the graph gets almost flat--in other words, not a lot of difference, and only discernible if you A-B test.

As for the cost/benefits of the multilam:

cost: heavier than alder
difficult and frustrating to finish
deemed not as "instrument-like" as the alder

benefits: economical use of material
high stability factor.

Mind telling me what your serial number is?

It's just fun to look back on some of these minor evolutions over time.

Just a real small point, since I saw it mentioned twice: The upright bass didn't develop from the violin family; it was a member of the older viol family. Viols have sloped shoulders, members of the violin family have round shoulders.

And as far as I remember from the viol consort class I took years ago, all members of the viol family were played upright; the smaller ones being held between the knees and most having gut or nylon 'frets' about halfway up the neck.

Best regards.

Thanks for the clarification; I did not know this. I stand corrected.

On page 17 of How the Fender Bass Changed the World by Jim Roberts there is a picture of a bass viol from 1701. It has 6 strings (!) and "...frets, which were pieces of gut tied around the fingerboard to provide more precise intonation."

As some anonymous wag said, "History is fascinating, it's just that there's so much of it!"

Like I said, it's a *tiny* point really. :) It's just that other manufacturers have, as far as I know, always called some of their products "Violin" basses or "Violin-shaped" basses - like the Beatle bass for instance. I've even seen them called - I think in the Elderly Instruments catalog - a "Viola" bass, which is still not quite correct.

Sorry to have intruded into the thread, but it's like when I hear people say "backslash" when they're talking about some url or another, you know?

By the way, congrats on the basses you're putting out; really distinctive and beautiful. In a way I guess they actually *are* more of a 'violin' shape though ;)

Warm regards, and continued success with your product!

Sorry to have intruded into the thread, but it's like when I hear people say "backslash" when they're talking about some url or another, you know?

It's even worse when people say "forward slash" instead of saying "slash." It's some kind of overelaborate back-formation from something that's already a mistake.

And now, back to our thread...

lee barker is full of cr*p
:rolleyes: :scowl:

lee barker is full of cr*p

I'm pretty sure they said the same thing about Galileo, Copernicus, and the Wright brothers.

A true visionary is seldom recognized as such.

Personally, I don't get the Mona Lisa. I mean, is she smiling, or did she just fart?? That doesn't make it any less of a masterpiece IMHO.

A while back there was a thread called 'where does your bass hang?' or something like that. The discussion involved opinions about the ideal position for holding a bass guitar. I remember replying to that thread that ideally, the neck would be close to vertical, similar to a classical guitarist's, because that position reduces strain on the tendons of the fingering arm. Of course this is not practical for a standard strap held electric bass guitar. This leads to the original question of what is the point of the Barker Bass. I am going to dismiss the issue of tone, because that is so subjective and in an amplified instrument is the result of so many factors unrelated to the construction of the instrument that it pales as an issue relative to the somewhat radical overall design of the Barker.

An offshoot of this thread is the comparison to a standard upright bass. The Barker is an electrified instrument with no practical acoustic sound, so this kind of comparison is a bit silly; the real comparison should be to electric uprights, like the NS Designs and the like. Most electric uprights have a scale length very close to a standard bass violin, without frets, because they have been designed for upright bass players who were looking for more volume and greater portability. The Barker, from what I can tell was designed by and for electric bass guitarists and therefore has a 34" scale which allows for comfortable playing of four notes per position throughout the length of the fretboard. It is, in essence, a semi-hollowbody electric bass stood on end.

Now that we know what we're talking about, we can ask the question 'Is it worth $3,000 to $4,000?' Many contributors to TB have raved about how great their SX basses sound and how well they're built for $125. It wouldn't take much imagination to make a forked or tripod endpin for an SX and create a 34" scale upright SX electric bass guitar. On resale, you wouldn't lose more than about $125. I daresay you would lose considerably more in reselling a Barker. Now, I don't mean to compare a cheap mass produced Chinese guitar to a handcrafted instrument made in a small workshop (although a lot of folks like to do that), but that is the price range that we're talking about here. Mr. Barker cannot possibly compete on cost with mass production facilities; he is basically making instruments one at a time at great cost to himself in time and materials. He is forced to price his instruments at a level that will sustain his business while not driving off potential buyers.

So, who would buy one?
1. someone who likes the overall concept and is uncomfortable playing a conventional bass guitar.
2. someone who is not concerned about resale value
3. someone who doesn't mind getting asked a slew of questions about his gear everywhere he plays
4. someone who doesn't play music for a living.

Disclaimer: I have never seen or played one of these basses. I based this response on information provided by the Barker web site.

Mantleclock, I was hanging in there with you right up to the point where you made your summary. Realizing that you have never played a Barker, perhaps you still don't fully understand the appeal.


1. someone who likes the overall concept and is uncomfortable playing a conventional bass guitar.
It is true that certain people may be more comfortable with the vertical orientation of the Barker, whether it be due to playing style, physical limitations or other factors. But there are many who routinely play a Barker that are quite comfortable with a conventional EB.


2. someone who is not concerned about resale value
As with any higher end bass purchase, resale value will absolutely take a hit. This is the price one pays when venturing into the boutique bass market, whether it's a Fodera, Sadowsky, FBB, Stambaugh, Conklin or Barker, or any other boutique builder. It comes with the territory ... ;)


3. someone who doesn't mind getting asked a slew of questions about his gear everywhere he plays
Again, any player of higher end basses will receive these queries. This is not limited to Barker by any means. However, it is true that the uniqueness of the bass is an attention-getter :D


4. someone who doesn't play music for a living.
This statement really doesn't make any sense to me. I will grant you that the average "rocker" probably wouldn't use a Barker, but a large percentage of the Barker players are serious musicians that are either making a living in music or are very active semi-pro's.

In your post you tended away from the tone issue in favor of the "radical overall design", but the tone is rather radical in and of itself. The sustain of the Barker is virtually unmatched by any other electric bass and is, in fact, one of the primary reasons players are drawn to it (and maybe in some cases why players shy away from it :) ). It is a unique sound .... not really an EB and not really a DB.

I would encourage you to try a Barker when the opportunity arises. It is quite unlike any other bass I have ever played. I don't know where you are located in the world, but should you ever find yourself in the greater NYC/NJ/Phila area give me a shout ..... :cool:

pointbass,

If I understand correctly, you more or less agree with the first three points in my summary. I brought up points 2 and 3 because they are legitimate concerns of some players. As far as gear gawking goes, only unusual looking instruments will draw the average person's attention. I don't consider bass players to be average people, and Joe Blow's non bass playing friends in the audience are not likely to say 'Wow, is that a Sadowsky Metro that dude's playing?' They're equally unlikely to say 'Man I just cannot believe the sustain on that Barker bass!' They will, however, take notice of the Barker bass regardless of what they're hearing or not hearing. It is not conventional looking.

I don't want to get into a flame war over the fourth point, but $3,000 is an awful lot of money for most full time bassists. And there are many more bassists out there who are excellent passionate musicians who don't rely on their playing to feed the family than there are that do. The main idea that I was trying to get across is that you have relatively few working bassists out there who can afford to spend several thousand dollars for a unique (and some might say novelty) instrument, and there are many, many great even radically great sounding instruments in the boutique market. So, as a professional bass player, with all of these choices, the real reason to choose a Barker is number 1 - you're more comfortable with an upright neck, and you can afford it. And there is nothing wrong with that...

Regardless of how much you love these Barkers, and how great you think they sound, you have to admit that they are not for everyone. The great guitarist Paul Galbraith had an 8-string guitar custom made for him that has fanned frets and an end-pin which sits on a resonating box (held cello style). It is a magnificent sounding instrument and you would think that every classical guitarist would want to have one after hearing it, but again, it isn't everybody's cup of tea. This thread started with the question 'What's the point and who would play one?' I only wanted to bring the focus back to that original question. I hope I haven't offended anyone in the process.

Mantleclock, no offense taken whatsoever :D You make some excellent points .....

And yes, I agree, these basses are definitely not for everyone. I would venture to go so far as to say that they have a very limited market appeal. As much as I like my B1 fretless 5, my main bass is a 7 string FBB with a fretless 6 FBB as it's primary backup.

I agree with you that the cash-poor working pro bassist would no more buy a Barker than he/she would a Fodera or Alembic. So that distinction has less to do with the bass design than it has to do with the value of the axe. $3k-$4K and up is big coin, regardless of the builder.

However, unless I'm seriously mistaken (a situation that, according to Mrs. PointBass, happens every single day :rolleyes: ), the average Barker owner is either a full-time pro or a serious semi-pro. So towards the question of who plays a Barker, the current roster indicates the average owner to be comprised of professional-level players.

Sure, the composite average pro bassist likely plays a Fender or other fender-esque instrument ... there are reasons that it is the industry standard. And that guy/gal would likely not spend big nickles on any boutique bass ..... :cool:

a quick comment on the 'novelty' comment :)

my barker b1 is my 'stage' bass, but it's also the first bass i reach for if i'm going to jam for fun, play a gig, do some recording, etc. 'novelty' for me now means having a bass that i have to wear--what an inconvenience!

so i suppose what is a novelty for some is the norm for others....:smug:

i agree with the idea that a barker bass is not for everyone--i know some bass manufacturers want their instruments to be for everyone, but truly this can never be. either way, i don't care about what is right for everyone, i want what is right for me.:D

later, ron

pointbass,

If I understand correctly, you more or less agree with the first three points in my summary. I brought up points 2 and 3 because they are legitimate concerns of some players. As far as gear gawking goes, only unusual looking instruments will draw the average person's attention. I don't consider bass players to be average people, and Joe Blow's non bass playing friends in the audience are not likely to say 'Wow, is that a Sadowsky Metro that dude's playing?' They're equally unlikely to say 'Man I just cannot believe the sustain on that Barker bass!' They will, however, take notice of the Barker bass regardless of what they're hearing or not hearing. It is not conventional looking.

I don't want to get into a flame war over the fourth point, but $3,000 is an awful lot of money for most full time bassists. And there are many more bassists out there who are excellent passionate musicians who don't rely on their playing to feed the family than there are that do. The main idea that I was trying to get across is that you have relatively few working bassists out there who can afford to spend several thousand dollars for a unique (and some might say novelty) instrument, and there are many, many great even radically great sounding instruments in the boutique market. So, as a professional bass player, with all of these choices, the real reason to choose a Barker is number 1 - you're more comfortable with an upright neck, and you can afford it. And there is nothing wrong with that...

Regardless of how much you love these Barkers, and how great you think they sound, you have to admit that they are not for everyone. The great guitarist Paul Galbraith had an 8-string guitar custom made for him that has fanned frets and an end-pin which sits on a resonating box (held cello style). It is a magnificent sounding instrument and you would think that every classical guitarist would want to have one after hearing it, but again, it isn't everybody's cup of tea. This thread started with the question 'What's the point and who would play one?' I only wanted to bring the focus back to that original question. I hope I haven't offended anyone in the process.

(and some might say novelty)

Notice that I parenthetically said 'some might'. I was giving reasons for why some people might not want to buy one. Obviously, anyone who buys and plays one does not look at it as a $3,000 novelty. I have a Guild Ashbory fretless that I use on gigs occasionally and in jams frequently. It is easy to transport, sounds great, and looks totally cool. As much as I like this bass, to most people, I'd confess that it is somewhat of a novelty, but for a couple hundred bucks, who cares.

Now, my Epiphone AirScreamer and Mojo Jojo guitars - those are novelties ;)

<snip> I have a Guild Ashbory fretless that I use on gigs occasionally and in jams frequently. It is easy to transport, sounds great, and looks totally cool. <end>

back off point: a friend of mine wanted to put together a band with electric mandolin, guild ashbory bass (i.e. me), and a flying vee pee wee. how cool would that be? nothing ever came of it, but we are still friends.

speaking of money, novelty, and market demand, have you cast one eye over at the fodera/value thread?

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=324174

everyone else has.... later, ron

electric mandolin, guild ashbory bass (i.e. me), and a flying vee pee wee.

Hey Ron.
Now I know where you're at :eyebrow: Sounds like a kool kombo, although those vee pee wee's don't do much for me. Come to think of it, full size V's don't thrill me either.

I haven't paid much attention to the Fodera threads. Fodera's and Sadowsky's, etc. are very very good basses. With a bass of that quality, what you're paying for is that incremental improvement in sound and attention to detail that you don't get out of a mass produced instrument. The analogy would be a comparison between a top of the line conservatory violin and a hand made professional instrument. The proof is in the playing (I've played violin for 40 years). The form is the same, but it's the nuance that you pay for. Another apt analogy would be comparing a 25 lb bicycle to a 16 lb bike. They'll both get you where you're going, they both look basically the same, but the price tags are not even close. To the casual rider, it's not worth it.

So, how does all of this rambling relate to the current thread? With Fodera's, and Sadowsky's you're paying for subtle differences in design and construction, and if you notice those differences, and they make a difference in your performance, then you'll be willing to pay whatever the market rate is. If you don't notice the difference, then you might be tempted to argue that your collection of SX's is just fine and that anyone would be nuts to pay more for a bass. The Barker, from what I have seen, is quite radically different from conventional basses, so it shouldn't take a leap of faith to figure out how it might significantly improve a player's comfort and performance, and if it does, then the same reason why someone is willing to pay $$$ and wait six months for a Fodera would be valid for a Barker.

And while I've got your attention, let me return to my first post in this thread where I said that I thought the most comfortable position to hold a bass, in theory, would be vertically. If you try this simple test, you'll see why you might swear by your Barker if you have one, and why you're at least intrigued by the idea of one if you don't. Here is the test: Hold your left arm out in front of your body with your elbow resting against your pelvis. Hold it there for one minute with your palm flat, your thumb pointing to the left and your fingers pointing towards the ceiling. (tick, tick, tick) Now, keeping your arm bent at the same angle, relax, and rotate your forearm to the right. That is essentially the difference between playing a horizontally oriented bass and a vertical bass.

Lee, do I get a free bass for that one? :D

look in the mirror,fellas,all for one and one for all! prove i'm wrong,J THE St, BARKER MILLIONS, you guys call attention to my remarks,by rallying arround each other"look what he said now"....etc.-i just stated i don't dig the barker bass-idea,price,sound,what it's supposed to replace(don't say it's not)-that shouldn't matter to anyone who does-it's just one person's opinion-i'm not badrapping anyone here-but, look who is-all of you-frankly,i think no response to anyone's views is the way to go-you won't change mine & i won't change yours-and i don't need the heir to my fortune to post this for me-----whoa!

hertzdem: I bought a B2 prototype from Lee Barker in December. He sold four of these prototypes on eBay. I got it for $1,000.00. After playing it for a while, I decided it wasn't for me, and that I preferred my Ibanez electric bass and my Shen double bass.

But a curious thing happened when I took the B2 out this week and started playing it........I couldn't stop. I adjusted the height of the B2 upward by 4-5 inches and that obviously made a tremendous difference.

I understand your antipathy toward Barker basses, because I felt the same way. But I've come 180 degrees in my opinion. It's obvious when you play a Barker that Lee has put a lot of craftsmanship and artistry into each one.

Anyway, I hope you stick around; yours is an interesting point of view.

what if someone wanted this instrument,but,had to draw the line(financially)as to how aesthetically beautiful he could go with it? would mr. barker build an instrument to his requirements and budget?less of the (admittedlyharsh)"fancy coffeetable" aspect and more of the actual" meat&potatoes" portion of what this thing is all about-what would it have to offer ,soundwise, without the premium giftwrap?

The 4 B2 prototypes that Lee Barker put up for sale on eBay last December are an example of a bass that doesn't have the aesthetic refinement of Lee's production models, but does have all the playability and sound quality.

These B2s were not as polished or finished (i.e., as beautiful) as the earlier B1s, or the Brio, but they played just as well. The B2 prototypes might have had some imperfections in the wood that were purely aesthetic, but whatever "imperfections" there were didn't affect the sound.

And the price of one of these B2 prototypes was less than half of what you'd pay for a B1 or a Brio.

Lee, do I get a free bass for that one? :D[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I was thinking maybe about one of these:

www.bogdonmusic.com

;)

Lee

Thanks! I'll be singing 'Wait a minute Mr. Postman' every day...

Lee, do I get a free bass for that one? :D

Yeah, I was thinking maybe about one of these:

www.bogdonmusic.com

;)

Lee[/QUOTE]

Hey Lee! I have one of the ultra low tech box's and it's pretty fabulous! After I came to see you in beautiful Redmond OR, I was very intrigued by the vertical bass. New roofs, car repair, and the general malaise of the economy here in Michigan have put my Barker order on hold for a while, but I'm getting a lot more comfortable with the vertical neck orientation.

This is us doing a rousing rendition of "Man In The Box" swing style, on the box. I expect the thing to fall apart at the seams at any given moment, but it really does sound sweet.

56074

Still saving my pennies...........

Hey Alex, good to hear from you. Durability is a great concern here at the R and D division of Barker Musical Instruments International, and of course we have Stealth Shoppers all over the world buying the competition so we can run it up the flag pole, drive it hard a few laps, run it through the TSA scanner and then try it with ranch dressing.

Your concern about "falling apart at the seams" is well placed. We've fast forwarded through that scenario using computer modeling and found that, with an application of some high tech adhesives, some select domestic hardwoods, some high quality hardware, a set of four actual strings, top notch electronics and some other stuff and we can help that bass be something slightly more than it is now. The Barker nameplate would be free, but there would be a slight charge for the other labor and materials.

Let's hope for a giant upswing in the Michigan economy real soon.

Take care, and come back soon. I really enjoyed your roadtest music on all the Barkers that were hangin' around here.

There is a YouTube bit with a solo on the BoxBass, and it's very good, but I bet you could whup him at it. Chops + charm = standing ovation. Or, in my case, walking ovation.

Kindly,

Lee

Yeah, that whole 4 strings thing would seem to be an advantage!!


I've got my Barker specs all figured out. It'll probably run me $10K but it'll be sweeeeet.

I'll stop chewing up your band width now!

Take care.