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.
Aesthetically do you lean more vintage or modern in your preferences ?
- Thread starter MAJOR METAL
- Start date
I'm leaning toward the vintage look, too. I outfitted my sunburst P-bass with the bridge and pickup covers and thumbrest to give it that vintage vibe. My Reverend basses have a retro appearance. The Lakland Jerry Scheff I recently picked up is sort of retro-looking with the gold sparkle paint job and lipstick pickups, and yet futuristic at the same time.
Vintage, I look at a bass as more a tool than a coffee table piece of furniture, although, I certainly do appreciate nice wood working skills, but draw the line and pukey burls & baby whale designs.
For me, I like the polar opposites. I like either very vintage designs, or very radical ones. So things like P and J Bass, but also Bongos and John Entwistle's Buzzard basses. None of that sharp B.C. Rich crap, though. Looks like they took a perfectly good bass and threw it at a band saw multiple times to see what would come from it.
not to confuse the issue, but in my mind, the 'vintage' fenders and such are very much modern design (possibly one of the most iconic examples, along with the automobiles of the era, around), and good modern design is timeless
...so, i'd say that aesthetically, i prefer modern, which includes the 'vintage' fender design (as well as good modern design from the present era)
...what i tend to not prefer is attempts of 'recreating' modern design as 'vintage' when lacking understanding and/or regard to the meaning and context of the modern original--that lasting power of these classic fender instruments has little to do with their age and lots to do with their inherent beauty and function, in my mind
...so, i'd say that aesthetically, i prefer modern, which includes the 'vintage' fender design (as well as good modern design from the present era)
...what i tend to not prefer is attempts of 'recreating' modern design as 'vintage' when lacking understanding and/or regard to the meaning and context of the modern original--that lasting power of these classic fender instruments has little to do with their age and lots to do with their inherent beauty and function, in my mind
More vintage than not.
I don't like sunburst finishes and pearloid pickguards, but as far as shapes are concerened, I'd go with a P-styled body. All that look-at-me-I-am-so-hardcore stuff just makes me frown.
I don't like sunburst finishes and pearloid pickguards, but as far as shapes are concerened, I'd go with a P-styled body. All that look-at-me-I-am-so-hardcore stuff just makes me frown.
If we're talking shape - then vintage Fender is fine or (gasp) my old Reverend's fit that bill with their retro - George Jetson meets Buddy Holly look ...
In basses - the Gibson EB series is certainly 'vintage' and there isn't one of them I could get excited about with the possible exception of the '2'. I own a 335 equivalent from the 70's and lust for the right SG so it isn't the body shape, just that it didn't belong on a bass... (IMO/IME/YMMV/ETC...). Nah, I think ()smoke() got it pretty close. What is so darned cool about the 57 and later Fender design is that form and function came together just about right.
That Sadowsky J that Bart posted a bit ago, the one with the pickguard the size of an aircraft carrier ? that there would be an example of an attempt at re-engineering the retro design gone wrong ... nice bass no doubt but that PG just has to go ...
In terms of contstruction, modern all the way. Folks who chase after some of the old stuff are romanced by the age - there was a bunch of swill back there too!
In terms of Carrot Cake, I prefer a 'born-on' date of no more than ((today()-3)
In basses - the Gibson EB series is certainly 'vintage' and there isn't one of them I could get excited about with the possible exception of the '2'. I own a 335 equivalent from the 70's and lust for the right SG so it isn't the body shape, just that it didn't belong on a bass... (IMO/IME/YMMV/ETC...). Nah, I think ()smoke() got it pretty close. What is so darned cool about the 57 and later Fender design is that form and function came together just about right.
That Sadowsky J that Bart posted a bit ago, the one with the pickguard the size of an aircraft carrier ? that there would be an example of an attempt at re-engineering the retro design gone wrong ... nice bass no doubt but that PG just has to go ...
In terms of contstruction, modern all the way. Folks who chase after some of the old stuff are romanced by the age - there was a bunch of swill back there too!
In terms of Carrot Cake, I prefer a 'born-on' date of no more than ((today()-3)
Carrot cake. I don't give a hoot about a vintage or modern look. It's all about comfort. I tend to lean towards modern body designs, but only for comfort purposes.
Interesting question. I'm all over the place with that.
I like vintage a lot, but my idea of vintage doesn't stop at contoured slab, painted, bolt-necked basses (the youngest of the pre-CBS Fenders are only seven years older than the first of the Alembic basses so many Fender owners love to ridicule with derogatory terms like "pukey" and "coffee table"). I also like the instruments like Modulus, Zon and Status with modern features like graphite necks. I would not buy a Steinberger or Kubicki, but I respect headless designs as much as those who own basses with them.
Tonewise, I usually prefer a modern sound- J over P, rounds over flats, low action over high. I'd love a five or six-string, but right now I have only four-bangers.
To revisit the whole "coffee table" insults issue: Anyone ever look at the history of lutherie? From a design and construction standpoint, those instruments have much more in common with everything else in the stringed instrument family than any Fender does, and they look like it. When I see a painted Fender with chrome hardware (I own a 'burst now, but have owned several painted ones), I think of household appliances from the 50s- washers, dryers, refrigerators, etc.. But when I see an Alembic, I think "this should have been the evolution of the upright".
I like vintage a lot, but my idea of vintage doesn't stop at contoured slab, painted, bolt-necked basses (the youngest of the pre-CBS Fenders are only seven years older than the first of the Alembic basses so many Fender owners love to ridicule with derogatory terms like "pukey" and "coffee table"). I also like the instruments like Modulus, Zon and Status with modern features like graphite necks. I would not buy a Steinberger or Kubicki, but I respect headless designs as much as those who own basses with them.
Tonewise, I usually prefer a modern sound- J over P, rounds over flats, low action over high. I'd love a five or six-string, but right now I have only four-bangers.
To revisit the whole "coffee table" insults issue: Anyone ever look at the history of lutherie? From a design and construction standpoint, those instruments have much more in common with everything else in the stringed instrument family than any Fender does, and they look like it. When I see a painted Fender with chrome hardware (I own a 'burst now, but have owned several painted ones), I think of household appliances from the 50s- washers, dryers, refrigerators, etc.. But when I see an Alembic, I think "this should have been the evolution of the upright".
It totally depends on the atmosphere and the bass. The Fender Jazz is a classic and a great looker, and I've owned two, but I suppose if I had to pick my overall preference I'd probably lean to more contemporary stylings; clean fronts, visually interesting woods, rounded edges, contrasting layers, natural or trans finishes, etc etc., all the stuff that Leo considered unnecessary in a workingman's instrument. However, that all goes out the window when you switch to g****rs. I do not like the look of superstrats and other contemporary-styled skinny-stringers; gimme a vintage Str*t or LP over a Schecter anyday.
mmm carrot cake, why did that have to be an option. that totally skews my opinion on the other stuff.
I pulled a TOTAL reversal about 10 years ago. up until that point everything had to look as modern as possible, and even then, it had to be upgraded so it looked even more modern. Now I'm the complete opposite. I play the hell out of a thunderbird, I'm customizing a ripper, and I'm selling my bc rich mockingbird, because even though they've been around forever, mine looks too new.
I pulled a TOTAL reversal about 10 years ago. up until that point everything had to look as modern as possible, and even then, it had to be upgraded so it looked even more modern. Now I'm the complete opposite. I play the hell out of a thunderbird, I'm customizing a ripper, and I'm selling my bc rich mockingbird, because even though they've been around forever, mine looks too new.
I used to be all modern in my preferences, but as I've gotten older vintage tones, vintage looks, vintage a lot of things have begun to appeal to me.
I'm a meat-and-potatoes kind of guy, myself. I like to keep it simple, including the aesthetic look of an instrument. To me, it doesn't get prettier than a P-Bass. It's timeless class...
