NEED HELP! 1964 Fender Jazz Bass

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by dreamteam96, Dec 11, 2013.


  1. dreamteam96

    dreamteam96

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2013
    Hey guys, thanks in advance for checking out my thread. I need help identifying if the pots and electronics on the Fender I just bought are original or not. The volume pots have matching numbers, which is about all I know. Another guy on the web had pictures of the guts of his 64 but a couple wire colors were different than mine so I'm getting worried the bass I bought isn't all original.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/54873327@N04/11328417703/


    Hopefully this photo works and is clear enough. I hope I didn't get duped into buying something I thought was all original.
  2. Mr.Fingers

    Mr.Fingers

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2009
    Location:
    Kalmthout, Belgium (Europe)
    there has been some tinkering with the wiring. Tonepot is a replacement (capacitor is original), and the grey plastic-covered wire between the pots and jack shouldn't be there.
  3. dreamteam96

    dreamteam96

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2013
    Wow are you serious/sure? Ha I just am very surprised as was really hoping that everything was original because I did not want to have a dispute with the guy I bought it from.
    So how do know if you don't mind me asking?
  4. msb

    msb

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2002
    Location:
    Halifax,N,S. Canada
    Pots were often replaced if they became dirty or scratchy . People didn't think it was a big deal to replace a five dollar part .
  5. Register to disable this ad
  6. BurningSkies

    BurningSkies

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Location:
    Seweracuse, NY
    Yes. the plastic wire is wrong, and it does look like the tone pot is a replacement.
  7. ExaltBass

    ExaltBass Just a BassGuy! Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Location:
    Twin Cities, MN
    Disclosures:
    Endorsing Lindsey Basses - crafter of XBass cables
    Yes, at that time I did that myself as needed... no DeoxIT then :(
  8. Mr.Fingers

    Mr.Fingers

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2009
    Location:
    Kalmthout, Belgium (Europe)
    I'm serious. This is how a '64 should look like:

    [​IMG]

    The wire between the pots is not necessary, since everything is connected/grounded via the metal control plate.
  9. dreamteam96

    dreamteam96

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2013
    Well thanks to your guys' help I'm trying to find a date for the tone pot on when it was made so I can prove that it is not original and hopefully get my money back. The number is 019064 and I can find other people who have much later basses with the pot but cannot find anything to date when they started using it. Any help with this step would be super appreciated!!
  10. BurningSkies

    BurningSkies

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Location:
    Seweracuse, NY
    Because that's not a manufacturer/date code. That's a modern Fender part number, and undoubtedly much later.

    You should probably take some time to put up some other pictures of the bass and/or its parts.
  11. Caca de Kick

    Caca de Kick Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    Location:
    Seattle / Tacoma
    Of course the grey wire isn't original. Looks like someone added it as an additional ground that probably wasn't really needed.

    Now as far as those pots go, maybe they are original: two are Stackpole brand and one is CTS brand, but check the actual date codes on them. I've seen plenty of old Fenders that had a mixed up CTS/Stackpole brand of pots in them, but the date codes were still close enough. I had a vintage P Bass that was that way; one CTS one Stackpole and virgin solder joints. Of course the majory had all matching pots. Your pic is too dark for me to tell or see any numbers.
    The codes you want to see:
    CTS= 137 xxxx
    SPole = 304 xxxx
  12. dreamteam96

    dreamteam96

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2013
    On the tone pot, which is what I'm guessing is the CTS pot there are numbers 019064 240K AUD 9935. Does that mean the pot is 1999? I have to go to work in like 2 minutes so I won't have time today to post more photos but hopefully that is enough info to on. Thanks again all you guys for your input!
  13. stratovarius

    stratovarius

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2010
    I'm not sure if that alone would be a deal-breaker for me, but it would be a good reason to take a closer look at everything else. If the rest of the instrument is original and the hasn't been refinished (if claimed otherwise), it is something that could be remedied without too much of an investment.
  14. BurningSkies

    BurningSkies

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Location:
    Seweracuse, NY
    And, depending it might be the kind of thing that you could 'adjust' the deal a bit. Not all original but close? Maybe you can get a few bucks back.
  15. msb

    msb

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2002
    Location:
    Halifax,N,S. Canada
    Changed pots would not be a deal breaker unless there are other reasons you don't want the bass .
  16. dreamteam96

    dreamteam96

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2013
    Well the point of the deal and how much I paid was that the whole bass was original. Meaning all parts are from 1964 making the bass more valuable.
  17. Caca de Kick

    Caca de Kick Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    Location:
    Seattle / Tacoma
    Is there any digits between the AUD and 9935?

    Could very well be one replaced pot.
    It woudn't have bothered me (since I have a set of late 63 pots stashed). But they can be found on the 'bay usually regularly.

Share This Page