2008 till today's Fenders

[Sparkl]

All I can saz is that I bought myself a brand new 2012 MIA Fender JBass which is the new version with custom shop 60s pups.

I can easily say that its the best fender j ive ever played and can easily compare the sound of my j with my friends premetro Sadowsky j.

[meatwad]

I like mine.

[boristhespider9]

Originally Posted by Geroi Asfalta

I'm probably about to catch alot of crap for this, but I dont like the new tuners, bridges, and I especially hate two piece maple necks. The ones with rosewood boards look nice, and sound nice, but he bridge and tuners kinda make me cringe.

I guess I'm a bent metal and skunkstripe person.

I don't know how anyone could say the old bridges are better. Regardless of whether you string through the bridge or the body, the new bridges are much more stable and still look traditional. I owned Pre 08 Am Stds and the bridge saddles used to always move up and down (well, really just down) unless you used loctite on the saddle height adjustment screws as most techs recommended. It was a common problem. The new nylon threads on the saddle height adjustment screws eliminate that problem. I think that was a great improvement while still keeping the traditional look. Not sure how you can complain about the post-2008 tuners either. These basses stay in tune and are very stable and the weight has been cut significantly while maintaining the traditional features. Much better overall than my Pre-2008 Am Stds. I don't see any objective evidence that the new components are worse, but I sure see evidence why they are better.

[Pet Sounds]

To the OP's question, I'd mention that while I agree about the enhanced quality starting in 2008, the 1985-2007 period is actually at least THREE different periods, each with pros and cons.
I don't have much experience with 1985-94 models, but haven't been impressed with the ones I've seen/played. In 1995, Fender rolled out the new American Standard bass line, with improvements like graphite-reinforced necks and overall better QC. I have a couple Ps from this era, and they're quite nice. I personally felt QC took a step backward with the introduction of the "American Series" basses in 2000, though many people like them. That series was discontinued in 2008 with the reintroduction of the American Standard lines.
So if you find a 1995-99 Fender bass you like for a good price, you may want to consider it. Above all, with all eras, try before you buy.

[meatwad]

Yeah, you can't take anything away from the function of the new bridges, period. Only from a vintage purist's standpoint could a valid point be made, and even then it's simple aesthetics.

That said, I'm still not crazy over the aesthetics of the tuners, but they feel smoother than any others I've had the pleasure of turning.

[landau roof]

My main gripe with the new bridge is its appearance, but beyond that, I find a hi-mass bridge to be utterly pointless on a string-thru instrument.

[EagleMoon]

Originally Posted by landau roof

My main gripe with the new bridge is its appearance, but beyond that, I find a hi-mass bridge to be utterly pointless on a string-thru instrument.

Not everyone uses the string through option. I found that stringing through the bridge or through the body made no difference in tone or sustain or anything. Plus its easier to twist a string when you string through the body. So I never used it.

[landau roof]

Originally Posted by EagleMoon

Not everyone uses the string through option. I found that stringing through the bridge or through the body made no difference in tone or sustain or anything. Plus its easier to twist a string when you string through the body. So I never used it.

I don't disagree, but I always use string-thru when equipped, if for no other reason to prevent ferrules from being lost. I know they're supposed to be glued in, but I've seen them pop out. More to the point, your experience is exactly why the hi-mass bridge is unnecessary to begin with. Just that combined with string-thru, it's doubly so.

[Sparkdog]

I've had a lot of pre-2008 Fenders, currently own a 2008 MIA Jazz, and have bought a couple newer than 2008.

Not bagging on Fender, I'm a Fender guy and always have been, but what I would say is that Fender's QC is hit and miss. There are dogs and diamonds from every era, but in general I have found that the odds of getting a good one definitely seemed to increase from the time of the 2008 model upgrades.

Still not 100% true...I bought an American Deluxe Precision last year that never should have left the factory...the electronics in that thing were f---ed up, plain and simple, but other than that I've been very impressed with the quality of the ones I've purchased and played.

[petrus61]

Originally Posted by Pet Sounds

To the OP's question, I'd mention that while I agree about the enhanced quality starting in 2008, the 1985-2007 period is actually at least THREE different periods, each with pros and cons.
I don't have much experience with 1985-94 models, but haven't been impressed with the ones I've seen/played. In 1995, Fender rolled out the new American Standard bass line, with improvements like graphite-reinforced necks and overall better QC. I have a couple Ps from this era, and they're quite nice. I personally felt QC took a step backward with the introduction of the "American Series" basses in 2000, though many people like them. That series was discontinued in 2008 with the reintroduction of the American Standard lines.
So if you find a 1995-99 Fender bass you like for a good price, you may want to consider it. Above all, with all eras, try before you buy.

Weren't those (85-94) the "boner" years? I found those exaggerated upper horns hideous.

[boristhespider9]

Originally Posted by landau roof

I don't disagree, but I always use string-thru when equipped, if for no other reason to prevent ferrules from being lost. I know they're supposed to be glued in, but I've seen them pop out. More to the point, your experience is exactly why the hi-mass bridge is unnecessary to begin with. Just that combined with string-thru, it's doubly so.

Well, it gives you the option and since a lot of people replaced the traditional bridges with BadAss or others (right or wrong), Fender probably figured they'd make one with more heft. But it's still traditional looking. The new saddles also allow for adjustable string spacing if desired. The big improvement in my view is the stability of the new saddle height adjustment screws that no longer allow slippage. Goodbye loc-tite!! That's progress.

[landau roof]

Originally Posted by boristhespider9

Well, it gives you the option and since a lot of people replaced the traditional bridges with BadAss or others (right or wrong), Fender probably figured they'd make one with more heft. But it's still traditional looking. The new saddles also allow for adjustable string spacing if desired. The big improvement in my view is the stability of the new saddle height adjustment screws that no longer allow slippage. Goodbye loc-tite!! That's progress.

They've been using grooved, adj. spacing saddles on US Standards and Deluxes since the mid-'90s AFAIK. I've never had to use Loc-tite on any bridge, personally (not saying that's a non-issue, just not for me - yet). What improvements were made that prevent the screws from backing out?

[boristhespider9]

Originally Posted by landau roof

They've been using grooved, adj. spacing saddles on US Standards and Deluxes since the mid-'90s AFAIK. I've never had to use Loc-tite on any bridge, personally (not saying that's a non-issue). What improvements were made that prevent the screws from backing out?

Well, my mistake on that if true. I don't recall my prior Am Stds having that.

The saddle height adjustment screws now have "nylon patches" to stop slippage. It looks to me like the entire screw is now coated or cased in a different material. But, I believe Fender describes it as nylon patching. It definitely works. I have mine strung through the bridge too. No issues with the ferrules falling out.

[JoeWPgh]

My 2012 American Deluxe Jazz is easily the nicest Fender I have ever played. Maybe even the nicest bass. I was shocked when it arrived, it so far exceeded what I had expected. Back in the 70s, Fender put out so many dogs that I refused to even consider a new one. That's not to say all 70's era basses were dogs and no new ones are. But there's no comparing the QC between those eras.

[king_biscuit]

Originally Posted by boristhespider9

Well, my mistake on that if true. I don't recall my prior Am Stds having that.

The saddle height adjustment screws now have "nylon patches" to stop slippage. It looks to me like the entire screw is now coated or cased in a different material. But, I believe Fender describes it as nylon patching. It definitely works. I have mine strung through the bridge too. No issues with the ferrules falling out.

Nylon will wear eventually, and it seems like it would mute the vibration between the strings, the bridge saddle, and the body. Also, I have never had to use loctite on the American Series Fenders I've had, and they did in fact have grooved bridge plates to eliminate side to side movement. The only real difference with the new bridge is the thicker backplate, which really just adds weight; IMO it's just a marketing gimmick.

[SJan3]

Originally Posted by king_biscuit

Nylon will wear eventually, and it seems like it would mute the vibration between the strings, the bridge saddle, and the body. Also, I have never had to use loctite on the American Series Fenders I've had, and they did in fact have grooved bridge plates to eliminate side to side movement. The only real difference with the new bridge is the thicker backplate, which really just adds weight; IMO it's just a marketing gimmick.

I completely agree with this. Nylon sounds like a sound deadener to me. Also, if you look a the new bridge, the backstop is a separate piece. I really don't hear any significant tonal difference. A bunch of malarchy if you ask me..

[boristhespider9]

Are you guys serious? Nylon patches on the saddle height adjustment screws is going to affect the sound? That's crazy-talk. Seriously?

And the floating saddles was a historical problem that was well known especially if you care about consistent action and intonation. I do, so I used loctite at the recommendation of numerous techs who had seen the same problem.

In any event, they are the best playing and sounding Am Stds I've ever played. Even with the nylon on the saddle height screws!!!!

Rock on.

[king_biscuit]

Originally Posted by boristhespider9

And the floating saddles was a historical problem that was well known especially if you care about consistent action an intonation. I do, so I used loctite at the recommendation of numerous techs who had seen the same problem.

Better tell EBMM (and numerous other manufacturers) about this, because they are still using bent metal bridges with non-nylon inserts -- I'm pretty sure I haven't had any trouble with those "old school" bridges either, though.

[petrus61]

Cant speak for the AmStd, but the moving saddle screws was a constant problem on my 62RI. I can see how nylon could have a negative effect but it could also be a positive, ultimately allowing for more solid bridge/ body connectivity. I am all for having the bridge be as traditionally functioning as possible, as I think it is an integral part of the classic Fender sound, but the pros of the nylon coating, at least on the surface, outweigh the cons.

[landau roof]

Originally Posted by petrus61

Cant speak for the AmStd, but the moving saddle screws was a constant problem on my 62RI.

Try moving the strings outward a thread or two, and the tension will keep them in place. Works for me.