Ok, this can turn into a polarising debate, however, I just watched this comparison
(the title/intro is a joke, FYI) and I only have a question:
Doubting that woods can make such a dramatic difference (and in fact a maple neck is on average snappy and lively) how come those Barts sound so crap and devoid of life compared to the Nordstrands?
I mean, exposed poles aside, I doubt someone can actually defend the tone difference on an objective basis. It downright plays 10 times worse and I was even listening through the TV speaker on a Chromecast... It's something you can easily pick blindfolded, and basically agreed at the end of the video too.
I have to say I have one of those very first BTB made in Japan "Premium models" (705ol, made in 1999 when the line came out, alongside the 1000 series) which had the "Ibanez dfr" pickups or similar. They were the ones before Barts were the norm in BTBs, but I've read somewhere that they were ghost-built or licenced by Bartolini. I can't confirm that at all, might be BS, but if there's something I didn't like about that bass was the output/tone presence (I wouldn't mind a low volume output as long as the tone is good, that's not the point at all) and hearing this comparison brings me back memories of that BTB when I played alongside, say, a Fender or a bass with a different pickup design. I wouldn't be surprised if there's the same house behind.
Are there great, punchy present examples of Barts or is it a brand whose trademark sound has always been such and dull by design?
I can expect a bit of backlash from Bart fans (if there are) and I'm open to everyone's opinions, but please do watch at least 2 minutes of that video to get what I mean.
