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

Am I crazy?

Feb 22, 2004
358
7
First, let me say that I like Ibanez basses and admire the company, I already own two Ibbys. BUT....I do have serious issue with their naturally finished basses. There is a huge discrepancy in the quality of woods (tops). This made me stay clear from the BTB676 and opted for a Schecter 6er instad.
Here is an example, from the newly announced SR Premium.

First the photos from the ibanez site:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

and

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Now, here are some pics from the vendors:
Ibanez%20SR1200EVNF%20Close.jpg


Ibanez%20SR1200EVNF%20Back.jpg


and

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

I do NOT like how these two real-life basses look and I think the top is strikingly different than what is show on the Ibanez site. Although the 2nd bass has a line-rich top, I find it rather dull.

So, although I'm really hyped for the new premiums and would want a 1205, I don't want a huge let down if I buy it sight unseen, what do you think?
 
I wouldnt even buy a natural top!

Give me some paint anyday over some fancy top!

This model is only offered in natural finish. My main gripe really is that this is a $1000 bass, and it's marketed as a top quality bass manufactured in Indonesia so it doesn't cost an arm and a leg.
But it seems to me, and I'd love to be wrong, that there is no good quality control in choosing the top wood. Cheap camera or not, the top of the first in-store bass in the pics above seems to be two grades lower than the one on Ibanez's site.
 
Humm, I am a big time Ibanez fan and yet I too have noticed the few natural finish SR's I have had had less than stellar grain. I just sold an SR1200 (a 1994 one) and it had terrible looking grain (aesthetically speaking), it was supposedly a flame maple top...it was not very flame-y. I wish I had a picture but I sold it before I took pictures. It had a serious pre-amp issue the seller never disclosed and I didnt feel like (couldn't afford) to deal with.
 
Well the difference can be explained quite easily. It's wood, every piece is going to be different. Also don't you think if you were taking pictures for your advertisements you would use the most killer tops for promotion?
Also I would bet Ibanez has a controlled studio to take pictures and using quality cameras.

You're best bet if you want one is to go visit them in person, or make sure the dealer sends you a picture of the actual bass you may be buying.

Good luck,
Dirk
 
Ibanez pays professional photographers to take photos in their studio under controlled conditions. The retailers usualy have their 12 year old stock boy with a digital camera take their photos.

OK, it's an exaggeration, but not far off.

Ibanez pays to make their basses look their best on their site. The retailers may pay a professional, but more than likely, they take their own photos in the back of the store. So the photos will vary widely from site to site.

It's best to go look at the bass in person. That's how you'll know if you like it or not.
 
Ibanez pays professional photographers to take photos in their studio under controlled conditions. The retailers usualy have their 12 year old stock boy with a digital camera take their photos.

OK, it's an exaggeration, but not far off.

Ibanez pays to make their basses look their best on their site. The retailers may pay a professional, but more than likely, they take their own photos in the back of the store. So the photos will vary widely from site to site.

It's best to go look at the bass in person. That's how you'll know if you like it or not.

Also, Ibanez (and everyone else for that matter) only takes pictures of their best looking basses.

FWIW The Perfect Bass takes awesome pictures of their stock.
 
@ SLaPiNFuNK: Even with the saturation corrected, you can see the top is not of the same quality as on Ibanez site, or the one from Sweetwater. This much variation tells me that the QC person doesn't really care, or maybe the quality of the top is not even on their checklists.

I think this may explain why the more expensive basses have consistent tops, so the top quality is really a function of the price. So one has to pay $2000-3000 to get something decent these days, I'm getting old I guess :D
 
oh I agree...

I was not anywhere near my computer with photoshop, so used what ever plugin Photobucket had... I could have done a better job...

The thing with these "tops" compared to that of a "boutique" instrument, these tops look really thin... More like a "laminate" than anything else...

This is one of the down sides to natural finished instruments especially if they are going to have woods with grain like this, you almost really need to see the EXACT one you are looking to purchase...

BUT, I would imagine if these tops / backs really are thinner "laminate" style, they should be pretty consistent...
 
Sweetwater has some really nice pics in their "guitar gallery" of basses for sale by serial number. I've purchased two basses from them (so far) for that very reason.
The pics were dead on with the actual basses.

I wish the Ibanez site would use better pics of their basses. Example: check out the pic of the SR600 in walnut flat - then go to Sweetwater, and look at an actual one.
 
Sweetwater has some really nice pics in their "guitar gallery" of basses for sale by serial number. I've purchased two basses from them (so far) for that very reason.
The pics were dead on with the actual basses.

I wish the Ibanez site would use better pics of their basses. Example: check out the pic of the SR600 in walnut flat - then go to Sweetwater, and look at an actual one.

+1. Kudos to Sweetwater for doing that, it definitely helps, theperfectbass has awesome pics too, but they don't have a lot of Ibbys these days.