• 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 free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Peavey Millennium BXP vs SX?

IotaNet

IotaNet

Supporting Member
Dec 8, 2004
3,566
503
64
Minneapolis (Chicago Native)
#1
To the Group -

Last night I had a thought and spent some time searching the forums to investigate. That process led to this post.

Usually, when someone asks about a "Cheap Bass," the first thing folks tend to suggest is an SX (Essex for the search engine.) They go on to discuss how they probably need to be upgraded to make them "sweet" and such. Don't get me wrong -- I have no problem with that.

I was looking however, at the MF website and saw the Peavey Millennium BXP's (5 and 4-string/active and passive.) These basses are selling for +/- $200 depending on configuration. They seem to be okay enough for entry-level axes and to my eyes, what you get out of the box seems to be equal to an "fixed-up" SX.

Quick point of comparison -- the SX 5-string Jazz is $129 + about $29 for shipping. That's $158. Add the money for new pots/pups/etc. and you're up to around $200.

The Peavey 5-string is right around $200/$250 (depending on if you get the active or passive) and I don't hear anything about bad necks/frets/or electronics on these.

I'm not hating on SX or the people who love them -- I'm just curious about why no emphatic recommendations for the Peavey BXP's?
 
#2
The Peaveys do not have the classic Fender profile. SX is popular because they look like Fenders. Peavey import Millenniums are just solid basses for people on a budget, they sort of fit the Fender profile, but they are not the exact copies that Sx mainly makes.
 
#3
P + V = onus

while there are actually quite a few people around here who appreciate peavey, i think the name still struggles with its past. very few people seem interested in recommending a peavey that isn't a cirrus or a classic 400.

as for my experience, i did QA on a bunch of millenium 4s one day. it was not very fun. nice instruments, but i have no SX experience with which to compare them. i only had a guitar amp to check that they had output. i never got to really listen or play.

[edit]while the above is true, i think dr. cheese really got it right. they're not fender enough.[/edit]

robb.
 
#7
I actually still own my very first bass, which just happens to be a Peavey Millenium 4 BXP. It, to this day is still my main four stringer. Plenty of great times to be had with this bass. I have learned alot on this bass, including how to service my own bass, restring, and truss rod adjustments.

The playabilty is off the wall for a bass of this price. Easily over powers the Ibanez GSR line of basses IMO... And keep in mind, I actually own an SR406, so no hating going on at all.

No matter how many Cirri Peavey puts out, no matter what features they offer, or what different species of wood combos, I don't think they will ever outrun their past, which is a darn shame considering the quality of their products today, Fury and Millenium lines included. (Maybe Peavey should start to follow in the footsteps of Ibanez, and start advertising guys like eVil J from Otep more to appeal to the younger metal crowd.)

I honestly can't say enough great things about thes BXP Milleniums. The only thing I would change, is making the pots Vol/Blend/Tone, but hey, it's supposed to be a Jazz bass, and when it comes to down right Jazz bass-esqueness, do what Fender does.

-ryan-
 
#8
deathbloomslife said:
(Maybe Peavey should start to follow in the footsteps of Ibanez, and start advertising guys like eVil J from Otep more to appeal to the younger metal crowd.)
Click to expand...

that's about all they do, in terms of copy -- push the new hardcore line. the amount of advertising is really the issue. when was the last time you saw a good peavey advert in several publications at once? any banner adverts? anything noteworthy like other companies?

yep.

robb.
 
#10
Zachass said:
I gotta say I don't mind peavey's bad rep, keeps the prices on these basses especially used american models nice and low. I'll take quality sound at a nice price over rep any day.
Click to expand...
I gotta agree. I turned to Peavey basses in 1981 with my T-40. It was new, free, and I wasn't sure I'd like it much compared to my P. I am in no way embarassed to state that I now play only Peavey basses (no, I am not good enough to be an endorsee, lol!). Over the years I have found them to be consistent, reliable, easy to play and they have given me the sound that I wanted. Yes, they were reasonably priced...even the Cirrus. I played the 4 and 5 BXP Millenium (and ACs) when they first hit and I couldn't believe the playability or tone at their respective price points. The only Peavey basses that I really haven't cared for were the Milestone (plywood) and the early Grind NTBs which I found way too variable in quality control-very unsual for Peavey.

my .02

Kim
 
  • Like
Reactions: lewink
#11
rok51 said:
The only Peavey basses that I really haven't cared for were the Milestone (plywood) and the early Grind NTBs which I found way too variable in quality control-very unsual for Peavey.
Click to expand...

what's wrong with plywood? my lyon by washburn P clone is made of plywood, and it's the most resonant sounding bass i've ever played. the parker fly is, essentially, made of [high quality] plywood.

we had to change factories a couple times with the grind NTB basses. the factory in vietnam where they were originally built made good samples and went to crap after the first production run. i don't know that they're still made in vietnam.

robb.
 
#14
The only Peavey basses that I really haven't cared for were the Milestone (plywood) and the early Grind NTBs which I found way too variable in quality control-very unsual for Peavey.
Click to expand...
+1, However, the older Grind BXP was a tremendously awesome instrument... I have no idea why they decided to compete in the 'el cheapo exotic wood and neck-through' bass-off with washburn and aria, and ruin a perfectly great bass.

-ryan-
 
#16
rcz said:
we had to change factories a couple times with the grind NTB basses. the factory in vietnam where they were originally built made good samples and went to crap after the first production run. i don't know that they're still made in vietnam.
Click to expand...
The made in Vietnam Grind NTB 6 string I played was excellent all around. My only complaint was that it was unbelievably heavy! It was as if it was made of lead. Heaviest bass I've ever held by a very vast margin. I could have never owned it. Sounded, looked, and played great though!

As for Peavey's "rep". I don't think it's bad among well informed musicians. I've been playing Peavey basses for over 15 years now, recently I bought my first Peavey amp, a modest little head. They have a reputation for making stuff that is servicable, unbreakable, sometimes very good, particularly in the high end, and fairly priced. Their stuff can usually equal or better the competition at all price points, all the way from the most modest Microbass practice amp to the most exotic Cirrus.

I've read up a little on Hartley Peavey and his company. The more I learn about Peavey the man and the company the more I want to patronize them.

I'm still tickled pink with the insane deal I got on my NOS USA made Millenium.
 
#18
rcz said:
what's wrong with plywood? my lyon by washburn P clone is made of plywood, and it's the most resonant sounding bass i've ever played. the parker fly is, essentially, made of [high quality] plywood.

we had to change factories a couple times with the grind NTB basses. the factory in vietnam where they were originally built made good samples and went to crap after the first production run. i don't know that they're still made in vietnam.

robb.
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with plywood! Should have been more specific...I was just refering to that particular Milestone bass that I didn't care for...it just happened to be 'plywood'. Heck, my '58 Dano longhorn (original) was two pieces of masonite separated by a series of little pine blocks...it sounded fine, lol!

I looked at a new NTB...both the wood and fretwork were a lot better than the majority of earlier ones I had played. The 'scallop' is gone from the newer ones, making them easier to spot.

Kim
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back