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
If I ever have an irresistable urge to get flamed, I just might do that.
While I could see a solid-body instrument possibly sounding VERY slightly different after several decades, it would not necessarily be "better". That's subjective. And any such changes would be largely due to the age of the wood and magnets, not how many times a note was plucked.
So I wouldn't personally rule out this particular J bass because it wouldn't sound as "good" as a well-played vintage instrument. When I buy a vintage piece, I want it to look vintage. Not necessarily trashed, but I want to see some experience on it. A mint specimen like this might very well be worth more to vintage collectors, but not to me. If I wanted a J like that I could just buy a Custom Shop 64 NOS.
I’m not going to open that thread, either. I’m fairly new here and I’m not yet ready for the TB community to grab their pitchforks and shovels and chant “stone the noob, stone the noob”. Besides that, I’ve been reading TB long before I joined and the dialog should be fairly predicable.
“It’s just complete and utter nonsense. Why are we even discussing this?”
“Do a search. This topic has been discussed to death in at least two dozen threads.”
“Just because we can’t yet scientifically measure the mojo in a bass yet doesn’t mean it’s not there. I can hear it and feel it. I don’t need science to tell me what I hear.”
“I have a 66 P-bass that a Hell’s Angel swung at Marty Balin at Altamont but he accidentally hit Ken Kesey in the shoulder. This bass has more mojo that any bass I’ve ever heard. If this bass could talk.”
“What’re the best songs for mojo? Anybody have any recommendations?”
“Your bass will sound totally different if you play Brown Eyed Girl, Roadhouse Blues and Badge by Cream in the same evening. But it has to be in front of a live audience with a lit cigarette a stuffed in the headstock.”
“I know there are some Gene Simmon haters here on TB, but ever since I played I Was Made For Loving You, I decided not to install the new pups I just bought and sold them on Craigslist.”
“It’s Gene Simmons, not ‘Simmon’.”
Etc.
“It’s just complete and utter nonsense. Why are we even discussing this?”
“Do a search. This topic has been discussed to death in at least two dozen threads.”
“Just because we can’t yet scientifically measure the mojo in a bass yet doesn’t mean it’s not there. I can hear it and feel it. I don’t need science to tell me what I hear.”
“I have a 66 P-bass that a Hell’s Angel swung at Marty Balin at Altamont but he accidentally hit Ken Kesey in the shoulder. This bass has more mojo that any bass I’ve ever heard. If this bass could talk.”
“What’re the best songs for mojo? Anybody have any recommendations?”
“Your bass will sound totally different if you play Brown Eyed Girl, Roadhouse Blues and Badge by Cream in the same evening. But it has to be in front of a live audience with a lit cigarette a stuffed in the headstock.”
“I know there are some Gene Simmon haters here on TB, but ever since I played I Was Made For Loving You, I decided not to install the new pups I just bought and sold them on Craigslist.”
“It’s Gene Simmons, not ‘Simmon’.”
Etc.
To my understanding, its not the playing per se that changes the instrument, its the sound vibrations that open up or change the wood characteristics in both the neck and the soundboard.
About 20 years ago, SWR was doing experiments by pumping high volume low frequencies through body blanks to open up the wood and try and remove "dead spot" issues before an instrument was even assembled.
So yes, an unplayed instrument might have different sound characteristics because it hasn't been being held in front of an amplifier receiving sonic vibrations these last 50 years.
Thank you for reading...please resume the "i know you are but what am I?" arguments as they are quite entertaining.
About 20 years ago, SWR was doing experiments by pumping high volume low frequencies through body blanks to open up the wood and try and remove "dead spot" issues before an instrument was even assembled.
So yes, an unplayed instrument might have different sound characteristics because it hasn't been being held in front of an amplifier receiving sonic vibrations these last 50 years.
Thank you for reading...please resume the "i know you are but what am I?" arguments as they are quite entertaining.
Here's an excerpt with my take on that topic from a post of mine from about 3 years ago:
- Oct 8, 2009
- 1,511
- 138
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: Babicz FCH Hardware
As others have said, in my limited experience with old fenders the ones in the best condition generally play like crap. The worn out and beaten to death ones are that way for a reason usually - sound and playability.
haha...it's alchemy, my friend
. The theory is because they haven't been played is a direct result of the fact that they came off the finish-line sounding poorly from the start. I.e. if you had a bass that sucked, you would not play it. But that doesn't make any sense either as one would just sell it and get another.
haha...it's alchemy, my friend
+1
The entire "mint vintage basses sound like crap" premise has no logical support whatsoever.
I'm glad we cleared this all up and we didn't even have to open a new thread. If it were true that playing a bass made it sound better, it would beg the question why anyone would ever buy a new bass. And myself, I like basses that are super clean rather than all beat up. I like the closet classic type look and it's comforting to know that my tone is not suffering because of it.
You guys appear to be discussing two similar yet different things interchangably. The idea that playing an instrument changes the instrument itself for better or worse, and the idea that mint vintage instruments are duds which is why they are mint. IMO the former has some truth, the latter is ridiculous despite how frequently it's parroted.
This jazz bass is awesome but I think the vintage instrument market is a tragedy as is the price on this bass. It will never get played as it should.
This jazz bass is awesome but I think the vintage instrument market is a tragedy as is the price on this bass. It will never get played as it should.
While it may have appeared that I hijacked the thread and took it in an unrelated tangent, I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't something inherently wrong with the bass before I purchased it, swapped out the pick-ups and painted it seaform green.
I doubt the bass in the original post will sell at that price. If that were going to happen, it would have sold within 24 hours of going up on ebay.
If it does sell, it should never be played as a daily player. There are tens upon tens of thousands of Jazz basses out there, but only the tiniest handful of mint 1962 Jazz basses. To put wear on such a bass would be vandalism. I'm no fan of the vintage market, but I can at least be thankful that it prices out the oafs that would put buckle rash and wear marks on an instrument like this.
If it does sell, it should never be played as a daily player. There are tens upon tens of thousands of Jazz basses out there, but only the tiniest handful of mint 1962 Jazz basses. To put wear on such a bass would be vandalism. I'm no fan of the vintage market, but I can at least be thankful that it prices out the oafs that would put buckle rash and wear marks on an instrument like this.
