• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Why the Road Worn hate?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Like the title says, why are players(especially guitarists) so keen on hating the MIM Road Worns? If you don't like it, don't buy it. It's that simple. I'm sure Fender doesn't need business advice from random folks out there. They are clearly catering to a certain group out there with the RW series, just like with their Vintage RIs. AND I've never seen anyone badmouth a CS relic. So why the RW? Just cause it's MIM and the CS is MIA? :eyebrow: :rollno:
 
personally for me, whether its a CS or MIM relic, I just can't stand the fact that i'm getting a "pre-worn" instrument. It feels phony, like superficial mojo. I think alot of people here share the same sentiments.

That being said, I think the Fender Road Worn Series basses that I've played have all been great from a pure playability angle. I just can't get past the concept of a "relic" job.

just my .02
 
Like the title says, why are players(especially guitarists) so keen on hating the MIM Road Worns? If you don't like it, don't buy it. It's that simple. I'm sure Fender doesn't need business advice from random folks out there. They are clearly catering to a certain group out there with the RW series, just like with their Vintage RIs. AND I've never seen anyone badmouth a CS relic. So why the RW? Just cause it's MIM and the CS is MIA? :eyebrow: :rollno:

For me (and I don't "hate" Road Worns), the concept just seems a bit strange, is all. Paying extra to have your bass artificially aged is just not something I'm willing to do. My opinion only. There are folks that love 'em though and that's the beauty of choice...there's something out there for everyone.
 
I think they look great, but I wouldnt want one.
I would feel a little fake...
The whole point of an old and worn bass for me is that it has been through so much and how much music it has played.
But I do see the appeal.
 
And another point...what do you say to someone who walks up to you at a gig and asks how old your bass is? "Oh, I picked it up new at GC a month ago" And then watch as they try to figure out why it looks beat to hell after only a month. I dunno...it just sets up possible conversations that I'd rather not engage in. Or I suppose you could lie and tell people that it's actually 40 years old but that's not my style at all.
 
And another point...what do you say to someone who walks up to you at a gig and asks how old your bass is?

You say it's a new bass, but you like the look of worn instruments.

I play a "relic" guitar, which has been done (not by me) pretty well. I often get complimented on my awesome piece of rock history, at which point I freely provide them with the info that it's only 2 years old, that I like the look of old crapped out instruments but can't stand the feel of most proper vintage stuff.

I buy faded jeans, because of the way they look, so why would I not buy a faded guitar?

I do agree that if you're lying about the age of your instrument, you're an idiot because it shouldn't matter. And if you don't like aged instruments then don't buy one.


I think a lot of hate comes from people who have old instruments and feel they've earnt a worn instrument by playing the hell out of it, and get miffed when someone else has that same look straight away. To these people I'd say that their playing ability will reflect the amount they've played an instrument as much as the paint job, so congratulations for being a diligent player.
 
It's all aesthetics, and not just visually. The idea that turns me off is that a modern hi-tech factory has tried to emulate the personality and look that comes, by definition, from being dragged around to play in many venues, getting beat up, broken, repaired, loved, lost, found, sold off and eventually come into my hands as a piece of music history. This doesn't feel right to me, and so I'm not too crazy about these faux-beat instruments from a purely aesthetic point of view. I have no doubt that they might play great, though, and some people dig the look for the look's sake, not for the history it implies.

We discuss bass gear and express our opinions of it, so I think a negative attitude towards RW is as legitimate as, say, a positive attitude towards tube amps, and shouldn't necessarily be considered 'hating'. I am well aware that many players don't necessarily agree with my gear preferences and I couldn't care less.

Peace

Martin
 
I have to admit, I've never seen a pair of pre-faded jeans that I liked the look off. But if the girl wearing them is hot enough I won't complain.:smug:

I think that we should reconsider the terms 'aged' or 'pre-aged' since they don't really refer to looks at all, just to the passing of time.

Martin
 
personally for me, whether its a CS or MIM relic, I just can't stand the fact that i'm getting a "pre-worn" instrument. It feels phony, like superficial mojo. I think alot of people here share the same sentiments.

That being said, I think the Fender Road Worn Series basses that I've played have all been great from a pure playability angle. I just can't get past the concept of a "relic" job.

just my .02

^Here and for what they are they are way overpriced IMO.
 
personally for me, whether its a CS or MIM relic, I just can't stand the fact that i'm getting a "pre-worn" instrument. It feels phony, like superficial mojo. I think alot of people here share the same sentiments.

That being said, I think the Fender Road Worn Series basses that I've played have all been great from a pure playability angle. I just can't get past the concept of a "relic" job.

just my .02

Big +1. Fender too really needs to start offering road worn cases as well. :):D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.