• 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.

Classic Vs. Crazy

I was just wondering what made you guys tick when it comes to classic styled basses (Fender, Sadowski, Lakeland, Mike Lull, etc.) vs. modern stlye models (Alembic, Warrior, F Basses, Fodera, etc.)? I happen to like both. I own a "cookie cutter" EBMM as well as some crazy high end "hippie sandwich" stuff like Warrior and Alembic. To me looks are secondary to everything else, but I know some of you are hardcore one way or the other. For me if a bass feels good and sounds good, I like it no matter the aesthetics. If you're like me and anything goes, no need to respond. This question is for those "hippie sandwich" haters and "cookie cutter" haters. What do you think? I'm very interested to know.
 
I put playability and feel first- if you're buying a quality instrument, you can usually change the sound quite a bit with different pickups, preamps, etc., but playability and feel are pretty hard to change and they're what makes a bass enjoyable to play.

But I do think looks are important- with all the great basses out there, there's no reason to settle for something that you don't think looks great. I'm definitely in the "crazy" looks camp- some classic Fenders look nice to me, but I always prefer exotic woods. And I don't mean flamed or quilted maple. I mean "that bass looks like a deranged leprachaun took too many drugs and then vomited on it" exotic.
 
I come from an art background, and arrived at bass as a middle-aged person. So I love the weird-looking basses! It's only recently that I've bought my first normal-looking Fender, and I had to get over my artsy-fartsy ego to make that purchase. In music, form and function twine around each other in interesting ways.