Good points, but trust me, it's probably best to walk away from this topic. You will get nowhere fast, and ultimately this thread will get locked. Many folks here are incapable of discussing this subject without getting emotional.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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
- Thread starter themacinator
- Start date
Good points, but trust me, it's probably best to walk away from this topic. You will get nowhere fast, and ultimately this thread will get locked. Many folks here are incapable of discussing this subject without getting emotional.
Gotta love those early bursts!
As an eBay Associate, TalkBass may earn a commission from qualifying purchases.
Not that I know of.
Which is why they shouldn't be making positive claims without evidence.
Nah - I'm perfectly willing to believe whatever the evidence shows. I'm not willing to believe anything anyone says about their easily fooled auditory system and their opinion on it - in either direction.
I'm subject to the McGurk effect... are you? And if your auditory system is so easily fooled there - why not elsewhere?
aborgman said:
They are making claims based on their own experience. They would all probably prefer to be making instruments based on their experience rather than setting up incredibly complex scientific experiments that would only yield limited practical results in narrow fields.
The onus falls just as heavily on those claiming no effect as it does on those claiming an effect.
Of course I am liable to the same auditory effects as everyone else, and I don't trust my ears and brain to work like a measuring device does. I'm open to suggestion, placebo effects, the works.
But I live in the real world, and if I pick up five identically specced basses and one sounds way better than the others, I'm not going to avoid choosing that one over the others because you say they couldn't possibly be different.
And if a luthier tap tests his lumber before choosing and assembling the parts made from it because his experience tells him a bass will sound better using resonant parts, I don't expect him to stop because all wood is supposed to make the same sound and/or the differences won't be noticeable.
The more I find out about how we perceive things through all of our senses, the more I realize how crude our measuring devices are and how crude our understanding of the processes are. It's not a negation of the science, but a realization that the science is in it's infancy.
I would never deny another person's reality unless you could prove to me that all the effects they think they perceive are psychological. Some people see tastes as forms and musical tones as colours, who am I to deny them this reality.
All I am saying is the sword cuts both ways, and we are very far from being able to resolve many of these issues yet.
Dan says wood matters, but not enough to make a difference.
I say some wood matters more than others (in my case I think the density of a piece of body wood and the stiffness of the neck wood makes an easily discernible difference in a given bass, all else being equal).
I just don't see how Dan, you, or I can be 100% correct in our assumptions, and even if so, that these hold true in everyone's experience.
In fact, there is very little real science out there, and certainly not enough to base any definitive conclusions from.
I can live with that.
True. The problem is, when such evidence is presented, those that are emotionally biased against the conclusion immediately reject it and seek ways to descredit it. I know from experience.
I wouldn't go that far. I've found that it does make a difference, albeit small and minor compared to things like pickups, strings, and the player. The problem is that many people (thanks to myth and marketing hype) have attributed tonal qualities like "bright" and "warm" to various wood species as a blanket rule. The truth is, it isn't that predictable. I've played Ash + Maple basses that sounded "warmer" or more "mellow" than Mahogany + Rosewood basses. So not only is the tone impact from wood subtle, and almost definitely lost in a mix situation, it can't be easily predicted by wood species.
So true. I've linked to this video many times, and I'll continue to do so. It plainly demonstrates the terrible flaws of human hearing and how easily it can be tricked:
Audio Myths Workshop - YouTube
I particularly like the story about how common it is for mixing engineers to tweak the EQ of a particular track, think they hear changes taking place, and then later realize the EQ was bypassed the whole time. This has happened to me in Pro Tools more times than I can count.
-=DanAtkinson=- said:True. The problem is, when such evidence is presented, those that are emotionally biased against the conclusion immediately reject it and seek ways to descredit it. I know from experience.
I wouldn't go that far. I've found that it does make a difference, albeit small and minor compared to things like pickups, strings, and the player. The problem is that many people (thanks to myth and marketing hype) have attributed tonal qualities like "bright" and "warm" to various wood species as a blanket rule. The truth is, it isn't that predictable. I've played Ash + Maple basses that sounded "warmer" or more "mellow" than Mahogany + Rosewood basses. So not only is the tone impact from wood subtle, and almost definitely lost in a mix situation, it can't be easily predicted by wood species.
So true. I've linked to this video many times, and I'll continue to do so. It plainly demonstrates the terrible flaws of human hearing and how easily it can be tricked:
Audio Myths Workshop - YouTube
I particularly like the story about how common it is for mixing engineers to tweak the EQ of a particular track, think they hear changes taking place, and then later realize the EQ was bypassed the whole time. This has happened to me in Pro Tools more times than I can count.
I agree with almost everything in this post.
The only thing I don't agree with is that are ears are flawed. They are perfectly designed to allow us to perceive what is important for us to survive, communicate, etc.
Sound doesn't exist, it's just what our brains recreate so we can make practical sense of the waves propagated by the movement of other animals, voices, and their distances relative to us.
Anyone can measure frequencies, measuring how we perceive them is still extremely approximate, a few crude algorithms notwithstanding.
These are not Luddite arguments, they simply illustrate the relatively basic understanding we still have of the way our senses, nervous system and brain recreate physical phenomena.
No, it really isn't.
Measuring how humans perceive sound is relatively easy - you just have to use humans as your test subjects.
Double blind testing of groups of human subjects do a spectacular job of measuring what is perceptible to human senses.
The main flaw in human hearing actually has nothing to do with the ears. It's the brain. That video I linked to does a great job of demonstrating this. Long story short, our ears can often be tricked by what the brain (and sometimes eyes) expects to hear. Like my example where the EQ was bypassed, but the mixing engineer could have sworn he heard audible changes as he tweaked it.
So that throws a HUGE monkey wrench into this whole debate, and is another reason why it's probably a waste of time discussing it.
Just gotta chime in here and say I believe that those basses ("world's cleanest jazz and worlds cleanest precision") are counterfeit.
Here's why:
-The black foam padding under the pickups was made out of a material that would have melted over time like in every other vintage fender- the foam on these look brand new.
-The frets have a patina and yet every other piece of metal on the guitar is brand new.
-The wiring looks very modern, I use the same exact cloth cables for all of my work.
-Switchcraft jacks have been around forever, but the ones on these basses look like they came right off of the shelf.
-The solder joints are all unlike solder joints on every other stock vintage Fender that I have seen.
-When the seller was asked "Has this been refinished?" His reply, which you can see on ebay was this: "If you have to ask then this guitar is not for you." -A very obvious way of protecting himself, not to mention his description of the basses, and his 98% feedback.. If you are familiar with ebay, you know that that is terrible feedback and you shouldn't be buying anything, especially something near $20K, from someone with that kind of reputation.
-No verifiable history of either bass.
-The penciled on dates look to be above the finish of the neck, rather than beneath.
-The case is brand new.
-These would have to have been kept in a climate controlled environment to be in the condition they are currently in.
-He has both a Jazz AND Precision in the SAME condition?
-He is unsure of their histories.
-As Staindbass pointed out: **RETURNS APPLY ONLY IF ITEM IS NOT AS DESCRIBED**
No "Buyer's remorse" returns!
(A 15% re-stocking fee will apply on "Buyer's remorse" returns.)
If returned, item MUST be in the exact same condition received. Item must be shipped back FULLY INSURED. Buyer is responsible for return shipping. Refund is for item's cost ONLY.
So basically, since he does not describe the item, or describes it as "hamana hamana hamana" ...Once you find out it's fake, you can't return it. You can only return it if it isn't "hamana hamana hamana" ...I'd love to see how that plays out in a court.
If it looks too good to be true, it might be. Guys, you don't want to pay $20,000 for a guitar that costs 1000 dollars to make. Go buy a fully custom guitar from one of the many builders on THIS forum for a fraction of the cost, and enjoy an instrument that sounds, feels, and plays infinitely better than any vintage guitar you will ever come across. And if you're really set on having a vintage guitar- do exactly what I described above but add this step: Wait 25 years. Voila, you're custom bass is now vintage. And it only cost you $3,000 dollars, not $20,000.
Here's why:
-The black foam padding under the pickups was made out of a material that would have melted over time like in every other vintage fender- the foam on these look brand new.
-The frets have a patina and yet every other piece of metal on the guitar is brand new.
-The wiring looks very modern, I use the same exact cloth cables for all of my work.
-Switchcraft jacks have been around forever, but the ones on these basses look like they came right off of the shelf.
-The solder joints are all unlike solder joints on every other stock vintage Fender that I have seen.
-When the seller was asked "Has this been refinished?" His reply, which you can see on ebay was this: "If you have to ask then this guitar is not for you." -A very obvious way of protecting himself, not to mention his description of the basses, and his 98% feedback.. If you are familiar with ebay, you know that that is terrible feedback and you shouldn't be buying anything, especially something near $20K, from someone with that kind of reputation.
-No verifiable history of either bass.
-The penciled on dates look to be above the finish of the neck, rather than beneath.
-The case is brand new.
-These would have to have been kept in a climate controlled environment to be in the condition they are currently in.
-He has both a Jazz AND Precision in the SAME condition?
-He is unsure of their histories.
-As Staindbass pointed out: **RETURNS APPLY ONLY IF ITEM IS NOT AS DESCRIBED**
No "Buyer's remorse" returns!
(A 15% re-stocking fee will apply on "Buyer's remorse" returns.)
If returned, item MUST be in the exact same condition received. Item must be shipped back FULLY INSURED. Buyer is responsible for return shipping. Refund is for item's cost ONLY.
So basically, since he does not describe the item, or describes it as "hamana hamana hamana" ...Once you find out it's fake, you can't return it. You can only return it if it isn't "hamana hamana hamana" ...I'd love to see how that plays out in a court.
If it looks too good to be true, it might be. Guys, you don't want to pay $20,000 for a guitar that costs 1000 dollars to make. Go buy a fully custom guitar from one of the many builders on THIS forum for a fraction of the cost, and enjoy an instrument that sounds, feels, and plays infinitely better than any vintage guitar you will ever come across. And if you're really set on having a vintage guitar- do exactly what I described above but add this step: Wait 25 years. Voila, you're custom bass is now vintage. And it only cost you $3,000 dollars, not $20,000.
i.e. a guy expects to hear punch...then he'll hear punch. Whether or not it's actually there does not rely on what he believes (unlike what some are trying to argue).
And he probably argued and walked away stuck in his own mind about it. "Those guys just can't hear it...but I heard it."
One thing I've learned in life so far is: people don't like to be wrong...and they like to hang on to "traditional" views.
Seriously, someone is selling what are in all probability counterfeit basses on Ebay for thousands of dollars and you all would rather derail this thread?
Yeah, if this was indeed the genuine article, there would be no need for such games and nonsense.
I tried to contact the seller to ask him what "hamana hamana hamana" means exactly, but apparently he's blocking all questions.
Yeah, if this was indeed the genuine article, there would be no need for such games and nonsense.
I tried to contact the seller to ask him what "hamana hamana hamana" means exactly, but apparently he's blocking all questions.
It might be because he gets a lot of flak. I'm sure he's the target of both praise and ridicule and he probably gets a lot of it.
you guys are trippin'. theres nothing wrong with the bass and he has to deal with yahoo's and guys who think they know what theyre talking about on a daily basis with the gear he's sold over the years. seriously, if youre asking if this bass is refinished, than its not for you.
actually just looked at etchbass' profile.. HA
tb-full of the youngest, least experienced vintage experts anywhere!
tb-full of the youngest, least experienced vintage experts anywhere!
