Behold the new VIGIER passion V IRL pictures

I really like most of the others... but this one looks just kind of blah to me. May sound like the voice of god though...

 

beautiful bass.I like it alot.

 

man, that's a nice bass.

but it's a passion IV. the passion V does not exist yet

i have a passion III, that's the previous model of your passion...

 

Without the graphite neck it's just very "meh" to me.

 

what does meh mean ?

 

Not that impressed. What attracted me to Vigier basses in the first place was the use of graphite components. Not to say that their wooden instruments don't sound great (Shawn Lane, anyone?) but if it doesn't have a graphite neck...

 

I'm on the fence with these, I don't mind the looks but I've never heard one and I've never played one, I would love to though.

 

well, then we both were right.
it's a passion IV (4th generation, with roman number), and it is a V string (if you want it that way)

can you compare it to older passion basses ?

 

I guy I know (who posts on the net under the name Ped) is a bit of a Vigier bass buff, he has had a few crackers...I'd like to know what he makes of these with their wood necks!

 

those wood necks are not "that much" wood. i mean, they don't have a truss rod, and they don't need them.

my bass has to be tuned only when i change strings, or when i slap too hard. but it's always because of the strings, not because of the neck. it is stable like a all graphite neck.

although the graphite neck might be a little edgier in sound.

 

Exactly, for me, graphite is very much a tonal thing. The stability it just a huge added bonus.

 

Those individual bridge saddles don't look evenly spaced. They look closer together on the G side and farther apart on the B side. I've noticed this on a lot of basses with bridges like this. Is it normal - as in "that's how it is supposed to be" or is it just really next to impossible to position them perfectly?

 

well, the passion III-model (90/10 necks here also) has no trussrod, and mine doesn't need one, so i have to say: you are wrong.

the thicker (and heavier) the strings are, the larger the amplitude of the oscillating string.
maybe that's the reason ? i'm not sure also...