New P bass finish
 

Hey guys, as some of you know I got a new American P bass last week and noticed today a minor ding or paint bubble maybe? Wanted to know if this is normal I tried really hard on camera to get it this was the best I could do.

Yes, those types of paint defects are normal and should be expected in Fender's American quality as of the last few years.

The paint formulations that Fender is forced to use by the enviromentalists has made it much more difficult to finish an instrument to perfection in a cost-effective way. The restrictions placed upon such instrument manufacturers in left-controlled states such as California has forced the consumer to pay more for inferior quality. The same thing has happened to other manufacturers who once upon a time had perfect state-of-the-art finishes such as Rickenbacker who has been forced to adapt to the times (and who now produces some of the best finishes they have ever produced). Perhaps maybe one day Fender will also improve the quality of their American finishes by investing some time and money back into them to keep defects like the one in your picture from ever making it to the purchaser's hands. But, I doubt it. The Japanese and Mexican finishes (I can't believe I'm typing this) are by far better quality on recent Fenders compared to the American versions. All you have to do is have good attention to detail and take a look for yourself...open your eyes and don't fall to the "American-made MUST be better" mantra regarding paintwork. There are many more factors involved regarding poor American finishes than the integrity of the guy who actually painted it. You can thank the EPA.

Didn't know that about the California laws, dang hippies *no offense to hippies* other than that it play/sounds amazing. I have a older Japanese P bass but I much prefer this new one.

Some proof and details?

Interesting if true, but I have my doubts.

http://earth911.com/news/2009/10/02/...cts-will-rise/

The California Air Resources Board (ARB) is cracking down on products that contain volatile organic compounds (VOCs), such as aerosol air fresheners and paint thinners, and is imposing a ban on high-VOC products starting in 2014.

Here's a simple breakdown of how the regulation will work, courtesy of the Associated Press:

Manufacturers will have to limit VOC content to 30 percent of the product's weight by 2010
The number would drop to 3 percent on January 1, 2014
Any reformulated products cannot substitute "gases that contribute to global warming" in order to achieve VOC reduction

Regulators say that emissions from products with VOCs contribute to smog. Photo: Flickr/Ben Amstutz
The expected impact of this law is two-fold:

1.It will prevent more than 14 tons of VOCs from entering the air daily. VOCs have been linked to asthma and cancer, as well as contributing to smog.
2.When manufacturers re-formulate products to comply with the standards, consumers will notice in their pocket books. The ARB estimates that the price of a gallon of paint thinner will increase by $1.50 under the new law, although the cost of air fresheners is not expected to rise.
California has been targeting VOC emissions since it signed The California Clean Air Act in 1988. The ARB reports that in the past 21 years, VOC emissions have dropped by 44 percent.

Industry representatives are already questioning whether they have enough time to safely comply with the mandates. In reality, the response will have to be even quicker, as Southern California is imposing the new restrictions starting in 2011 under a separate rule.

One material where VOC content has already been addressed is paint. Most paint manufacturers now offer low or no-VOC options, in part because of state laws that enforced VOC standards. In that case as well, California was the first state to take action.

While reducing the VOC quantity of products may improve air quality, it has little impact on disposal. Products such as aerosol sprays and paint thinners are still considered hazardous, meaning many states prevent them from disposal in landfills.

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which sets policy in four Southern California counties, is updating its standards regarding volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in paints and other coatings. The proposed changes would cut maximum VOC limits in half for primers, special primers, sealers, and undercoaters from 100 grams per liter (g/L) to 50 g/L, and would also slash VOC maximums for a number of specialized coating types.

Another proposed change would limit VOCs to 50 g/L in colorants that are added to base paint at the point of sale. Even when base paints have low levels of VOCs, many tints, which are currently unregulated, can elevate VOC levels in the final product. While the proposed changes apply only within SCAQMD, the new standards will have an impact throughout California and even the entire U.S., because large paint manufacturers will need to change their formulas in order to sell products in densely populated Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernar-dino, and Riverside counties, and because the influential LEED rating system references the standards.

Well you certainly have a right to return it but to be honest with you I had a hard time seeing it in your pic even with it circled in red so it must be even less noticeable in person.

If you love the way it plays and sounds then I would live with it and chalk it up to the first of many little dings and imperfections it will have before you retire it. You could order another and experience the same.

MIA or not quality is expensive but perfection is unaffordable and for the most part it doesn't exist.

So you are guessing that this is the reason for the flaw, I suppose, unless you know that the paint types have changed already and that they are the cause of this flaw, or at least that Fender has not found a way or spent the money to ensure the new type paints are applied properly?

I see nothing that describes the quality of the finishes being better or worse under the new directives either.

I'm not looking for an argument here, and I know next to nothing about paints and finishes. I do recognize industry's Modus Operandi of discrediting any laws designed to protect the environment (or perhaps the people who live in that environment if we want to look at it from a different angle) when it will cost anything to implement them, and the penchant for lobbies to tell a one-sided story when it suits them. I also recognize a lightly disguised political rant against industry regulation when I see it.

Then shut the **** up. :D

Then I'd rather stick with some "defective" finishes, provided that's the real reason.
It's up to fender adapting to the new standard at this point, you can't blame enviromental laws.

Interesting info...

That's basically what it has boiled down to. For those who aren't familiar with painting and VOC's, California is trying to force paints that are fully WATER based. In a nutshell, water-based painting materials are 100 fold more prone to difficulties in the finishing process. What was once a more simplified process has now greatly expanded, leaving MANY more areas for defects to arise. That's how you end up with fisheyes, bubbles, drips, indentations, and other finish blems...they are simply MUCH more likely with water-based systems, and they take TIME to correct. Time costs money. The new regulations cost money. Costs get passed on to the consumer, to a point. When that point is reached, "acceptable" quality levels are reduced, and instruments with small defects go out the door...because most purchasers won't care...especially since some of the blind "only USA-made is good" fanboys will refuse to admit ANY inferior quality aspect on an American-made product. Thus, standards get reduced...until Japanese, Mexican, and Chinese finishes start surpassing the California-sprayed paintjobs. Which, they have.

I see what you're saying, but I also think that mere productivity and the paint finish quality of a bass guitar is not the first priority in the grand scheme of things.
Of course Fender must make profit, they shall reduce the QC rather than invest money to raise it. They are the one to blame, if anyone, because pricing is nothing but going up anyway as of lately. However, it's the first time I hear this and this has never been an issue for any other USA or Euro (which are subject to the same or similar laws I'm sure) builder as far as I know. Is this a California thing only?

I'm trying to learn something here. Not funny and very insulting no matter how many smileys you put next to it, sorry.

The reason I said I'm not looking for an argument is because I'm not. I would like to know if what you are describing is fact or conjecture.

If you know a lot about the subject please share your knowledge.

If you are making guesses based on a possibly unrelated article you will have to back it up at some point if truth matters to you at all, which I'm assuming it does..

Is Fender using these new water based paints now?

Oh c'mon. That wasn't serious...that wasn't offensive; it was funny. I laughed. Twice. If you chose to ignore the smiley and be offended, so be it. Aren't you supposed to be tolerant?

:eek:

I'm not offended. I'm not taking your bait, either.

Since you are not comfortable defending your 'facts' I guess it's more fun to ignore my questions and make this about my character, but I'm not playing, sorry.

BTW, I tolerate a lot of things. Crappy humour is where I draw the line.

Even on my 27" monitor, I had a hard time seeing a finish defect.

What ggoat says is partially true. The high VOC finishes (nitro) have been outlawed, or heavily regulated in many states - not just hippie environmental leaning ones. The reason is that as beautiful as a nirto finish is, it's some really nasty stuff. Guitars have little if anything to do with these regulations. They were aimed primarily to control the VOC pollution of auto body shops that had no VOC containment and used tons more nitro on older car finishes.

How is Fender allowed to make the 2013 line of AVRI guitars and basses still with nitro finishes then?

I'm really confused now- I thought the finishes on American Standards we are discussing were urethane and not nitro based? OT, I have also heard that in fact you can spray nitro in CA if you use proper containment and safety equipment, as Fender is and has been doing doing on their AV series instruments?