Appearance is a major factor for me. It's not like we live in a world without hundreds of basses that look, feel, and sound amazing.
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.
Does Headstock Appearance Matter To You?
- Thread starter CoffeeLove
- Start date
Fender Clones should have a Fender shaped head stock, shouldn't that copyright have expired by now? Anything else looks weird to me. On any non fender-shaped bass I'm not so picky.
I'm one of the few I think who does not care for matching/painted headstocks. Crazy I know, but they look sort of "cheap" to me compared to the natural wood showing. Makes no sense, as I know they're actually the opposite!
Said it before, I'll say it again: I just cannot get past the post-lawsuit G&L design.
BUT I'm an expendable $1,700 away from making an exception for the new Fallout shorty.
I'd be lying if I said I only loved my basses for their personalities.
As at least two have said, with so many great instruments out there (especially if you happily play basic Fender-ish things, like me), no need to acquire or keep one that bothers you. That said, some have grown on me (Spector “Gumby,” standard Fender), some have fallen out of favor with me (hockey sticks), and some I have deemed “not bad enough” to jettison (most Ibanez).
Favourite shapes:
Fender
MusicMan
Yamaha BB
Guild
Least favourite:
Alembic styles except “flowerpot”
Pointy
Anything ridiculously minimalist.
I dig the Kubicki ex-factor, though. Clever.
Fender
MusicMan
Yamaha BB
Guild
Least favourite:
Alembic styles except “flowerpot”
Pointy
Anything ridiculously minimalist.
I dig the Kubicki ex-factor, though. Clever.
It's thought by some that many early stringed instruments were designed after the curvy hour glass shape of a woman. Don't recall where I read this but it does seem to be plausible.
Just look at the backside of a Fender P or J Bass, looks like the top shoulders and curvy waistline of a woman to me. Coincidence?
If this were true, then the woman's shape has long been adored and immortalized so stringed instruments should have an attractive headstock to adorn it wouldn't you say?
A couple headstocks posted here I would say look ugly.
Just look at the backside of a Fender P or J Bass, looks like the top shoulders and curvy waistline of a woman to me. Coincidence?
If this were true, then the woman's shape has long been adored and immortalized so stringed instruments should have an attractive headstock to adorn it wouldn't you say?
A couple headstocks posted here I would say look ugly.
Last edited:
The whole design of the instrument matters to me. If the headstock fits with the overall design aesthetics I will probably like it.
An FBass wouldn’t look right with an all inline headstock:
Just like the Bongo may have a weird headstock but works perfectly with the rest of the design:
An FBass wouldn’t look right with an all inline headstock:
Just like the Bongo may have a weird headstock but works perfectly with the rest of the design:
When I saw the shape of the Yamaha BBNE2 headstock, it was among the most important aesthetic factors in my decision to buy it. It reminds me of the Stingray type shape, but somehow tweaked to look even nicer.
BobDeRosa
Commercial User
- May 16, 2012
- 2,445
- 4,403
- Disclosures
- Owner, Tritone Jazz Fantasy Camps
I find these results amazing. As I write this, nearly 2 out of 3 bass players consider the appearance of their headstock important. I challenge you two-thirds (you know who you are) to put your bass away at the end of a gig and then ask anyone who heard you to describe your headstock, or even name its color. I guarantee you that even the bassists in your audience won't be able to tell you.
Nice! I thought I would be alone on this thread with listing Yamaha BB as a cool shape- cheers!
If I don’t like the look of a bass, I’m never going to even pick it up. There are too many great sounding instruments out there to compromise on anything.
I absolutely agree. No audience member will care, but the question as I answered it is does the shape matter to me.
You make an excellent point though.
Yes. There are too many basses that are nice to play, make a good sound and look good for me to waste time with some ugly.
I could probably get past the headstock to own a Lull jazz, but it's still one of the things that keeps me from being in the serious hunt for one.
I confess that I hate 3L+1R, 4L+1R tuning machine placements where the headstock is grossly imbalanced like that. I just cannot stand it. Tiny headstocks rustle my jimmies too, but nowhere as much. But the worst offenders are headless basses, that is just the ugliest freaking thing ever designed. I mean, I just cannot see any good reason for giving your bass the Marie Antoinette treatment, dangit
FWIW I firmly believe looks matter in the performing arts, and try to play instruments that look the part for the gig. I make an exception for my L-2500 because it's so versatile, but it's all around the ugliest headstock I own.
