• 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.

1962 Jazz $20K on the bay

#301
ProgramaticNonF said:
I did call him, very cool dude. I asked him how these things were kept so clean, he said he doesn't know the original seller. He acquired these through an auction house (I didn't ask which one, it wasn't a guitar only auction).

He said that out of all the pre CBS basses he's had, these are the cleanest and the best he's ever had or ever will have. He said that a collector obviously purchased them and just stashed them away.
Click to expand...

He got it and the other clean '61 P at HA (Heritage Auctions).

Invalid Link Removed
 
#302
slick_tu said:
I wonder why the Ampeg RI Dan Armstrong Plexiglass basses aren't flying off the shelves? Doesn't seem to be any desire for the old Kramers with the aluminum neck either.
Click to expand...

The originals didn't sound great and were really heavy! In addition, they weren't really associated with any big players for very long, I think they misjudged the demand when reissuing it.

Check this one out:

Invalid Link Removed

The Kramers were also quite neck heavy, and apparently were hard to keep in tune, maybe that has something to do with their lack of enduring popularity. There are quite a few guys here that rock them, though!

If you want a cool collectible with an aluminium neck, you can try this Travis Bean:

http://www.bassnw.com/Used Basses/travis_bean_tb2000_229.htm
 
#304
I'm going to get a nice Res-O-Glass bass one day. Maybe one of those old National Map basses. They look like a lot of fun.

The only piece of crap bass I ever owned was a Kramer Duke. The neck bowed to make it unplayable within 6 months. Not that it was playable before that. Ah, still miss those skinny ties.
 
#305
Sorry, I was being rhetorical. I remember hearing a Dan Armstrong back in the late 60's and thinking how it didn't sound much like a bass. I recall in the 70's, the Kramers just didn't feel right. I think, later, they started painting the back of the neck trying to overcome that, didn't they?
 
#307
Templar said:
The argument always starts the same way, by antagonistic zealots who cannot resist telling other members, that;

In the end, it boils down to trolling.
Click to expand...

You clearly missed the parts of my posts where I said I have no vested interest in either side of the argument. If they have a very discern-able difference, whoop-dee. But if they don't, then people are talking out their asses. That's the point.

And from what I've seen and heard, it's all the "I heard it, so it must be there" muck. When in fact it ignores the dozen or so other variables on the instruments.

And in light of having more than a few people disagree with what I've said, the only substantial rebuttals are "I can hear it, must be you can't" and "I disagree" with nothing else. So once again, unless someone can prove otherwise, there is no reason for me, IMO, to not say "there is no discern-able difference".
 
#308
Templar said:
* That all established instrument builders (the real experts) and parts suppliers are deliberately perpetuating "myths", in order to take advantage of gullible suckers.
Click to expand...

Every expert says there's a very discern-able difference between bolt-on sound and neck through sound?

Interesting.


But anyways, when someone has proof against my position, I would change it immediately and accordingly. I've searched, can't find any but opinion.
 
#314
johnk_10 said:
:rollno:






how about keeping this thread on topic for a change?
Click to expand...

It'd be easier to do so if you left out the condescending emoticons. Which is odd, considering that's all you've contributed for roughly the past 5 or 6 of your posts.

If only I wish I could believe something merely on account of my "feelings" or "sense" of it. But I can't, I live in a world that is not inherently subjective. Once again, I have no desire either way. Merely asked for factual analysis.

/my contribution in regards to the specific topic, as I have no interest in running the thread off course any longer. Although, still searching for factual, experiment-based evidence so if anyone has any/can find any, feel free to PM me.
 
#317
michael_atw said:
Actually, it was a conversation between other people and he interjected himself with a string of :rollno: emoticons and "I disgree", "I disagree" posts.

But alas...must...refrain...from...response...:hiding::help:
Click to expand...

Eh, I'd let it go. John's been building basses longer than most guys here and his personal vintage collection is amazing. He knows more than a wee bit about this stuff. ;)
 
#319
Mastermold said:
Looks like it's about wood and strings. Weird seeing someone want to argue with JohnK about this stuff. :confused:
Click to expand...

When it comes to wood, I'm sure someone like JohnK can better hear the very subtle differences between wood species in solid-body electric instruments. It takes decades of experience to develop that ability.

The question is, are the differences significant enough to be meaningful in the practical world? My ears, my own experiments, and similar experiments I've seen and heard tell me no.

But this is religion to many around here, so I'll leave it at that.
 
#320
Seems like a good place for a bass player to park some money. One could put the money in the stock market, but for most, that's just gambling. We're not on the board of directors, for the most part, and we're not on the inside.

We are bass players though, and some of us like the tone of an old Fender bass. And yes, our ears are big enough to hear the difference between a vintage bass and something newer. If you can't hear it or want to say no one can, that's fine; I don't have the time or inclination to debate. Don't buy it, and don't place a high value on vintage instruments. Others of us will.

A bass like this serves as an investment, especially since the economy is in the crapper, and likely to stay there for a while yet. The price of this bass is low, and will go up when the economy improves. It also serves as a musical instrument, and can be played, although it might be best to be played under very safe conditions, such as at rehearsal studios and recording studios. It also just satisfies a longing for something of quality in one's life. Perhaps it fulfills all the yearning one had as a younger man when money was scarce. Perhaps it reminds one of days gone by, like when you played in a killer local band back in '68, and you actually had a '62.

If you don't see value in a bass like this, that's cool, and your prerogative. Others of us do, and maybe might even buy this bass ;)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back