The thing with Fenders is...

[Cadfael]

The thing with Fender is ...

to bust a myth - and make it even bigger ...

I heard so many sh**t about "glorious Fender" while Leo Fender just tried to build cheap, good sounding and usable/practical basses ...
The body wood often depended on the colour and nothing else (or basses were painted twice to get the "custom extra price"). Blond > Ash, Sunburst > mostly Alder (because of the wood structure).

Fender from 1950-65 (and later) has always been chaos, exceptions to the rule, take whatever is present.

BUT at the same time Leo Fender (and his workers) were genius - building what bass players needed. Leo Fender opened new ways and possibilities for players. Some simple inventions (like his "screw bridges") built the sound of generations.
"Better" sustain or attack do not interest me because I love the sound his solutions produce(d).

Somehow Leo Fender is comparable to Porsche.
The most important Porsche is not the 911 but the VW Käfer (Beetle) and it's "Kübelwagen" WWII version. While other cars broke down in the ice of Russia, the desserts of Africa, the beetle "went on and on and on" ... The Beetle still drives in all continents of the world and works.

Leo Fender invented a concept of "mass basses" which make it easy to play bass with a high "Precision". Since 1951 Fender basses "play on and on and on" ...

[Moe Monsarrat]

I agree with awilkie84 to some extent. As long as what I'm playing actually sounds not only acceptable but better than what their P bass or Jazz does in the mix, it has never come up even as a studio player. If your rig doesn't sound better then you are sacrificing the track just to have it your way. I can't see what good that does for anyone regardless of the situation.

[sven kalmar]

i agree very much with Cadfael.

[banyaksuka]

I think a Fender-P is the sort of go to bass, much like a strat for guitarists. Personally, I think Fender has damaged both their image and credibility with all this "made is usa", "made in mexico", made in japan", not to mention all the squire stuff. While they certainly sell more guitars, if you buy a Gibson (for example), you know what you're getting: quality.

[drTSTingray]

Originally Posted by Jazz Ad

Boost like hell, add super bright strings and you get a disaster. There is less ways to sound bad on a P bass.

I believe this can be correct - but equally there are less ways to sound good on a P bass (dependent on your definition of good). It is a great leveller - have you ever noticed how many people sound very similar on them - it takes a spectacular player like Jamerson, Palladino or Geezer Butler etc to do something more with them.

In that sense I rather despair of this 'if you don't play a P bass you won't get any work' mindset - that seems a means of neutering a whole range of a bass player's art to me. Perhaps producers have just got lazy, or don't see the bass as playing the part now that it did in the past.

[Scott in Dallas]

I'm not sure why some people confuse sitting well in the mix with not being heard. Listen to the first Boston album. The bass sits perfectly in the mix, but you have no difficulty hearing the parts.

[Steve Dallman]

In the mid 70's, I was in a loud hard rock band in northern WI. I had a 68 Jazz bass. I wanted a NEW bass, so I headed to the music store in Wausau, intending to buy a new P bass. But I hated the feel and look of those 76 P basses, so I bought an ebony Gibson Ripper.

That Ripper had more highs and lows than my Jazz, but it would just get lost in the mix. I'd plug in the Jazz, and it would just cut through fine.

A few months later I saw an ad for a P bass for $200. It was a 64 with a great wide, but flat neck. That was THE bass. The Ripper and Jazz went by the wayside. The 64 P had the cut and presence I looked for. It had it's downsides. The stock pickup was miswound and buzzed as one coil had fewer windings than the other. I could never get the D string balanced. I replaced it with the first Dimarzio P pickup and it was a great improvement. I changed the bridge to a heavier one that improved sustain.

I met with an Alembic rep in the early 80s. I asked if they could build me a long scale, but swap the dummy coil and the neck pickup. He thought I was crazy and could not see any reason to do so. I wanted one that would cut through the mix.

[Stone Soup]

Originally Posted by Scott in Dallas

I'm not sure why some people confuse sitting well in the mix with not being heard. Listen to the first Boston album. The bass sits perfectly in the mix, but you have no difficulty hearing the parts.

That's not a Fender. It's a Gibson EB0 with a Jazz Bass pickup in it.

[PWRL]

For a time there, I had a fretless Precision with an ebony board, heavy northern ash body and and an Alembic Activator pickup. It had THE classic bass tone, and sat in a mix like nothing else. It was a very flexible instrument, if you could play it on the money all the time. Now, my hands just like my Warwick a great deal more, and with the bands I play in, it tends to fit a lot more. However, the one tool I have consistently kept in my arsenal more than any other bass I've owned is my Fender Jaguar bass, because I can dial in all those classic Fender bass tones that are on so many records. I can buy and sell a hundred different top of the line basses, but that one is going to stay for just that reason.

[banyaksuka]

I'm not sure this "cutting through the mix" stuff has much to do with the bass you are playing. Probably the result of a bad sound technician, poor amps, poor microphones, etc.

[sven kalmar]

yes sure..in the best studios in the world...

[stepswork4me]

There was time period that bass was just mixed way down. It was just the standard in rock and the like. Bass heavy music has resurfaced and MANY brands with various pups and placements cut through spectacularly; Ibanez, Spector, Warwick, etc... They are recorded regularly without issue. The old lie is dead my friends.

[Hopkins]

Dude either needs a set up on that Jazz or he needs to adjust his playing style. All that string clank is distracting.

[Fenwick]

I found the Fender sounded better, more overall frequency range and more growl, which is supposedly so characteristic of Warwicks. I own no Fenders and one German Streamer LX4. I was seriously dismayed.

Until my suspicions were echoed and people identified this as a rockbass, though the video producer claims it's a German on YT. What's the consensus? I hope I'm right and my ears can tell the difference between cheap shite and decent craftsmanship. I suppose this is only relevant if that premise (Rockbass vs AmFen, rather than German W vs AmFen) is correct, but I'd like to hear a test(s!) between a real German Warwick and an Amercian Fender. I think a good comparison might be a Corvette Standard vs a Jazz or a neck-soloed LX4 vs a Precision.

[Lorenzop]

Yeah I also thought it was a german Streamer in the video but - is it??!

[Scott in Dallas]

Originally Posted by Stone Soup

That's not a Fender. It's a Gibson EB0 with a Jazz Bass pickup in it.

Yeah, I know that, but it's irrelevant. It's a perfect example of sitting in the mix.

[dabbler]

Originally Posted by TigerInATrance

This is not right in many cases. It's like saying that bass lines shouldn't ever stray from the 1 or be melodic, or that the bass player should never be out front and part of the show. It reeks of the old "quarter notes pay the bills" adage that's as relevant as June Cleaver bringing Ward his pipe, slippers and newspaper when he arrives home from work.

Fender basses have a place, but they are no Skeleton key, jack of all trades, be all end all, panacea of electric bass correctryingtitude. They are traditional looking and sounding instruments that don't exude enough extroverted energy to get egomaniacal guitar players panties all twisted up in a bunch.

While I agree with most of what you said, both you and others in this thread are illustrating a pet peeve of mine. Different strokes for different folks. Of course Leo didn't create an aggressive rock metal monster take no prisoners bass... he wasn't trying to. In fact, you could argue that he failed at what he probably WAS trying to do, replace the upright bass with an instrument that was electrified. The bass guitar has not replaced the urb. But Hammond also failed when he created his famed organ, he was trying to make an electric pipe organ.

So what is my pet peeve? OF COURSE there is no bass that does it all! Why even say it? AND why keep talking about music and instruments with little regard to the context in which they were created or are typically used? To ignore context is to stereotype. And I hope we all know what's wrong with that!

Anyway, back on topic, Fender basses do seem to work in a LOT of contexts, simply because they were used on so much classic music. So muh of the popular music I grew up with was made on either a p or j. that it just sounds "right". Do they do everything? No. But then, nothing does.

[unclejane]

Originally Posted by Scott in Dallas

I'm not sure why some people confuse sitting well in the mix with not being heard. Listen to the first Boston album. The bass sits perfectly in the mix, but you have no difficulty hearing the parts.

What "sitting well in the mix" means _is_ being heard. And it's generally best if you can be heard at the lowest possible volume - this detracts the least from the other instruments in the mix.

In the video in the OP, there's just no comparison, in my view - the warwick sounds better in absolutely every way. A nice hump in the upper midbass, less click and clop, cleaner notes, and even the player visibly has to work less hard to get the notes out of it. Notice how the warwick sounds louder pretty much all the time - that's because it's, well, a better sound . You could turn it down and still hear the midbass pop without the band-drowning lows and the soul-killing click/clack of the player trying to hammer out a decent note that you get with the Jazz bass.

But then again, the exact type of tone you want may in fact be that flat, cloppy thing you get out of the Jazz bass. In that case, you just have to make it work and with enough adjustment you often can. So the actual tone is more just what you want and you go from there when doing the mix.

I tend to prefer the lowest possible volume on the bass but still hearing distinct notes; that's what moves me away from Fenders and towards the instruments I use. But YMMV.

LS

[Old Fart]

Originally Posted by Cadfael

Somehow Leo Fender is comparable to Porsche....

If Porsche had not done it, the world's engineers would say it is impossible. Design and build an air-cooled, high-performance engine that could go a half-million miles between rebuilds. How did they do it? They chose a simple design, and made hundreds of subtle design changes until that simple engine worked perfectly. German engineering superiority is not about complexity. It is about simplicity and perfecting that simple design through attention to the small details. Fenders do not have LED lights or onboard tuners or headless necks or one-piece construction or GPS navigation or cup holders (Porsches did not have cup holders until the late nineties). Fenders represent the outcome of constant small, simple improvements in a simple design. The location and curve of the upper edge of the pickguard, for example. That alone is a deal-breaker for me. My thumb wants to feel a P or J pickguard edge. The list goes on.......

[jamestown94west]

Originally Posted by Lorenzop

Yeah I also thought it was a german Streamer in the video but - is it??!

Yes, it is most definitely a rockbass